Primary study · included by 2 reviews

Maxillary sinus membrane perforation rate utilizing osseodensification-mediated transcrestal sinus floor elevation: A multicenter clinical study.

Mazor 2024 · Mazor Ziv, Gaspar Joao, Silva Robert, et al. · Clinical implant dentistry and related research · 2024

Included by

Incidence of sinus membrane perforation in transcrestal graftless maxillary sinus augmentation: a meta-analysis.

Non-Cochrane · prognostic · 2026 · cited as Mazor 2024 · Table 1; reference list

Outcome this study informs	Pooled effect	Evidence	Certainty
Schneiderian membrane perforation incidence Graftless transcrestal sinus floor elevation (all techniques) vs None (single-arm incidence) · Intraoperative	Pooled proportion 0.04 [0.02, 0.09]	13 studies · 2083 participants	GRADE not reported
Schneiderian membrane perforation incidence Graftless transcrestal sinus floor elevation (all techniques) vs None (single-arm incidence) · Intraoperative	Pooled proportion 0.03 [0.02, 0.07]	13 studies · 2090 participants	GRADE not reported
Schneiderian membrane perforation Graftless transcrestal sinus floor elevation (any technique) vs None (single-arm incidence) · Intraoperative	Meta-regression coefficient 0.0183	14 studies	GRADE not reported
Schneiderian membrane perforation incidence Graftless transcrestal sinus floor elevation (all techniques) vs None (single-arm incidence) · Intraoperative	Pooled proportion 0.01 [0, 0.17]	4 studies · 1472 participants	GRADE not reported
Schneiderian membrane perforation incidence Graftless transcrestal sinus floor elevation (all techniques) vs None (single-arm incidence) · Intraoperative	Pooled proportion 0.05 [0.02, 0.09]	13 studies · 2102 participants	GRADE not reported
Schneiderian membrane perforation incidence Graftless transcrestal sinus floor elevation (all techniques) vs None (single-arm incidence) · Intraoperative	Pooled proportion 0.05 [0.02, 0.10]	13 studies · 2059 participants	GRADE not reported
Schneiderian membrane perforation Graftless transcrestal sinus floor elevation (any technique) vs None (single-arm incidence) · Intraoperative	Pooled proportion (incidence) 0.01 [0, 0.08]	8 studies · 1322 participants	GRADE not reported
Schneiderian membrane perforation incidence Graftless transcrestal sinus floor elevation (all techniques) vs None (single-arm incidence) · Intraoperative	Pooled proportion 0.04 [0.02, 0.09]	13 studies · 1886 participants	GRADE not reported
Schneiderian membrane perforation Graftless transcrestal sinus floor elevation (any technique) vs None (single-arm incidence) · Intraoperative	Pooled proportion (incidence) 0.0109 [0.0019, 0.0597]	14 studies · 2119 participants	Very low
Schneiderian membrane perforation incidence Graftless transcrestal sinus floor elevation (all techniques) vs None (single-arm incidence) · Intraoperative	Pooled proportion 0.05 [0.02, 0.10]	13 studies · 1939 participants	GRADE not reported
Schneiderian membrane perforation incidence Graftless transcrestal sinus floor elevation (all techniques) vs None (single-arm incidence) · Intraoperative	Pooled proportion 0.04 [0.02, 0.09]	13 studies · 1870 participants	GRADE not reported
Schneiderian membrane perforation Graftless transcrestal sinus floor elevation (any technique) vs None (single-arm incidence) · Intraoperative	Meta-regression coefficient -0.0064	14 studies	GRADE not reported
Schneiderian membrane perforation incidence Graftless transcrestal sinus floor elevation (all techniques) vs None (single-arm incidence) · Intraoperative	Pooled proportion 0.06 [0.03, 0.12]	13 studies · 1193 participants	GRADE not reported
Schneiderian membrane perforation incidence Graftless transcrestal sinus floor elevation (all techniques) vs None (single-arm incidence) · Intraoperative	Pooled proportion 0.05 [0.02, 0.09]	13 studies · 2102 participants	GRADE not reported
Schneiderian membrane perforation incidence Graftless transcrestal sinus floor elevation (all techniques) vs None (single-arm incidence) · Intraoperative	Pooled proportion 0.05 [0.02, 0.10]	13 studies · 2023 participants	GRADE not reported
Schneiderian membrane perforation incidence Graftless transcrestal sinus floor elevation (all techniques) vs None (single-arm incidence) · Intraoperative	Pooled proportion 0.03 [0.02, 0.08]	13 studies · 1902 participants	GRADE not reported
Schneiderian membrane perforation incidence Graftless transcrestal sinus floor elevation (all techniques) vs None (single-arm incidence) · Intraoperative	Pooled proportion 0.04 [0, 0.24]	5 studies · 165 participants	GRADE not reported
Schneiderian membrane perforation Graftless transcrestal sinus floor elevation (any technique) vs None (single-arm incidence) · Intraoperative	Pooled proportion (incidence) 0.01 [0, 0.17]	6 studies · 797 participants	GRADE not reported
Schneiderian membrane perforation incidence Graftless transcrestal sinus floor elevation (all techniques) vs None (single-arm incidence) · Intraoperative	Pooled proportion 0.04 [0.02, 0.09]	13 studies · 2105 participants	GRADE not reported
Schneiderian membrane perforation incidence Graftless transcrestal sinus floor elevation (all techniques) vs None (single-arm incidence) · Intraoperative	Pooled proportion 0.05 [0.02, 0.09]	13 studies · 2100 participants	GRADE not reported
Schneiderian membrane perforation incidence Graftless transcrestal sinus floor elevation (all techniques) vs None (single-arm incidence) · Intraoperative	Pooled proportion 0.04 [0.02, 0.09]	13 studies · 2093 participants	GRADE not reported
Schneiderian membrane perforation Graftless transcrestal sinus floor elevation (any technique) vs None (single-arm incidence) · Intraoperative	Pooled proportion (incidence) 0 [0, 0.01]	4 studies · 233 participants	GRADE not reported

Incidence and Associated Factors of Schneiderian Membrane Perforation in Maxillary Sinus Floor Elevation: A Meta-Analysis.

Non-Cochrane · aetiology · 2026 · cited as Mazor 2024 · Table 1; reference list

The review does not say which of its outcomes this study informs.

2 including reviews in total.