Comparison of the Grind-out and Hydraulic Pressure Techniques for Transcrestal Sinus Floor Elevation with Simultaneous Implant Placement: A Clinical Study

Objectives: Our study aimed to compare the clinical efficacy of grind-out and hydraulic pressure techniques for transcrestal sinus floor elevation (TSFE) through a clinical retrospective analysis. Materials and Methods: 40 patients who received TSFE with simultaneous implant placement using either the grind-out or the hydraulic pressure technique were included. We compared the clinical effects of these two methods through following parameters: primary outcomes included bone augmentation volume at Tn (BAV _n ), the bone graft volume resorption rate at Tn (BGVRR _n-1 ). bone augmentation height at Tn (BAH _Tn ), resorption rate of bone graft height at Tn (RRBGH _n-1 ). T0: before surgery, T1: immediately post-surgery, T2: 6 months post-surgery, T3: 12 months post-surgery. Secondary outcome included: VAS scores and swelling scores from days 0, 1, 3, 5 and 7 postoperatively. Group differences were assessed using t-tests, Mann–Whitney U tests, and generalized estimating equation. Results: Among 40 patients (21 patients for hydraulic pressure group, 19 patients for grind-out technique group), the BGVRR ₁ , BGVRR ₂ , RRBGH ₁ and RRBGH ₂ of the hydraulic pressure group was significantly higher than that in the grind-out technique group ( P < 0.001), whereas no significant differences were observed in BAV ₂ , BAV ₃ , BAH _T2 and BAH _T3 between the two groups. The grind-out technique group showing lower VAS and swelling scores than the hydraulic pressure group ( P < 0.05). In both groups, the VAS pain and swelling scores gradually decreased over time. Conclusions: Grind-out and hydraulic techniques are both effective for TSFE and implant placement, but the grind-out method shows less bone resorption and postoperative discomfort.