Objectives: The purpose of the study was to evaluate guided osseodensification for maxillary sinus lifting versus free hand technique during implant placement clinically and radiographically Patient and method: In this study implants at a maxillary posterior area were performed on 20 patients who were divided randomly into two equal groups Group I: patients with a ridge from 5-6 mm. length will receive dental implants simultaneously with conventional free hand osseodensification technique and bone grafting. Group II: Patients with a ridge of 5-6 mm in length will receive dental implants simultaneously with guided osseodensification and bone grafting. Patients were clinically evaluated using a modified plaque index, modified sulcus bleeding index and peri-implant probing depth at baseline,3, 6 and 12 months. Implant stability will be measured at baseline and 6 months postoperative with an (Osstell®) ISQ implant stability meter. Volumetric Assessment Changes in sinus volume by comparing three-dimensional cone beam computed tomography at baseline and 12 months after sinus augmentation. Results: Regarding clinical parameters, plaque index (PI), peri-implant probing depth (PPD) and implant stability (ISQ), no statistically significant difference was found between both groups at the different intervals. At the same time, implant stability (insertion torque) showed a statistically significant difference in the free-hand group in relation to the guided group. Regarding reduction in sinus volume (Cm3), no statistically significant difference was found between both groups