Trial reportClinical oral implants research2026
Digitally Guided Hydraulic Crestal Sinus Floor Elevation Versus Free-Hand Osteotome Technique: A Single-Blinded Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial.
Trial report in Clinical oral implants research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes of crestal sinus floor elevation (SFE) using a digital surgical guide (DSG) and hydraulic sinus lift technique versus the conventional osteotome technique.
methodsPatients requiring crestal SFE and single-implant placement in the posterior maxilla with a minimum of 5 mm of residual bone height were included and randomly assigned to two groups of crestal SFE with (i) the conventional technique (elevation of a mucoperiosteal flap and SFE by the osteotome technique, control group) and (ii) by using a DSG (without flap elevation, by using the sinus lift hydraulic system in the presence of a DSG, test group). Frequency of intraoperative membrane perforation, surgical time, and patient-reported outcomes were collected. Crestal bone loss at 6 months, new bone formation in the sinus, and implant position were assessed.
resultsTwenty-three patients (24 implants, 12 in each group) were included. The DSG group experienced significantly lower postoperative pain (measured by the number of analgesics taken, 1.67 ± 0.77 vs. 2.75 ± 1.21, p = 0.028), shorter surgical time (22.3 ± 2.4 vs. 33.1 ± 4.1 min, p < 0.001), and smaller deviation of implant angulation from the ideal position (2.9° ± 0.6° vs. 8.6° ± 1.3°, p < 0.001) compared to the conventional group. The difference in other parameters was not significant.
conclusionConsidering the study limitations, using a DSG with a hydraulic system for crestal SFE was superior to the conventional technique regarding pain score, surgical time, and implant angulation. Due to the relatively small sample size and lack of statistically significant differences in some parameters, these findings should be interpreted with caution.
trial registrationIranian Registry of Clinical Trials: IRCT20230529058333N1.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.