ArticleClinical oral investigations2026
Effectiveness and influencing factors of strip-cushioning transcrestal sinus floor elevation: a clinical retrospective study.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate effectiveness of the strip-cushioning TSFE with simultaneous implant placement; and to investigate its potential influencing factors, including anatomical variations. The primary outcome was endo-sinus bone gain (ESBG) before prosthesis. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis retrospective study assessed ESBG and crestal bone level (CBL) using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) before surgery (T0), immediately after surgery (T1), and before prosthesis (T2), along with peri-apical radiographs at prosthesis (T3) and during post-loading follow-ups (T4 to T6). One-way repeated measures ANOVA assessed bone height changes. Univariate and multivariate generalized linear mixed models (GLMM) identified the factors influencing ESBG and Schneiderian membrane perforation rate.
resultsA total of 88 patients with 107 implants were included. Bone height under sinus floor significantly increased at five peri-implant positions from T0 to T1 and T2. The mean ESBG was 5.55 mm (T1) and 4.62 mm (T2). GLMM revealed the first molar site (p = 0.036) and RBH < 5 mm (p < 0.001) were significantly associated with higher ESBG. Schneiderian membrane perforation occurred in 12 sites (11.2%). T1 ESBG/mesiodistal elevation width (MEW) > 0.8 was significantly associated with higher perforation risk (p = 0.011). ESBG and CBL significantly declined during post-loading follow-ups (T4 to T6) compared to T3.
conclusionsThe strip-cushioning technique led to radiographically detectable ESBG before prosthesis, which appeared related to RBH and implant site. Membrane perforation was more likely with a higher T1 ESBG/MEW ratio. Notably, as challenging anatomical variations did not adversely affect these outcomes, this technique may be considered a viable option in demanding clinical situations. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The strip-cushioning TSFE should be considered a viable option for sinus floor elevation in cases with challenging maxillary sinus anatomical variations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42026350What 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.