Dental and Medical Problems

Dent. Med. Probl.
Index Copernicus (ICV 2018) – 113.05
MNiSW – 20
Average rejection rate – 70.86%
ISSN 1644-387X (print)
ISSN 2300-9020 (online)
Periodicity – quarterly

Download original text (EN)

Dental and Medical Problems

2020, vol. 57, nr 2, April-June, p. 149–156

doi: 10.17219/dmp/114982

Publication type: original article

Language: English

Download citation:

  • BIBTEX (JabRef, Mendeley)
  • RIS (Papers, Reference Manager, RefWorks, Zotero)

Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 3.0 Open Access

Clinical significance of maxillary sinus hypoplasia in dentistry: A CBCT study

Znaczenie kliniczne niedorozwoju zatoki szczękowej w stomatologii – badanie w tomografii stożkowej

Numan Dedeoğlu1,A,B,D,E, Suayip Burak Duman1,B,D,E,F

1 Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Faculty of Dentistry, İnönü University, Malatya, Turkey

Abstract

Background. The anatomy of the maxillary sinus is especially important for dentists due to the close proximity of the sinus to the maxillary posterior teeth.
Objectives. The aim of the present study was to investigate the frequency of maxillary sinus pathology, anatomical variations, and the relationship between the tooth roots and the maxillary sinus by comparing a group with maxillary sinus hypoplasia (MSH) and a control group using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT).
Material and Methods. In the study, 69 CBCT images of 50 patients with MSH and 84 CBCT images of 49 patients without MSH were evaluated for pathology, and the presence of an accessory ostium, a septum and Haller cells in each maxillary sinus.
Results. The coincidence of pathology with MSH was 29%, and with non-hypoplastic maxillary sinuses it was 44% (p = 0.055). An accessory ostium was found in 14.5% of scans with MSH and in 39.3% of those without MSH (p = 0.001). Haller cells were found in 2.9% of the MSH cases, whereas their incidence in the control group was 23.8% (p = 0.000). The occurrence of a sinus septum was at the level of 4.3% in the group with MSH and 23.8% in the group without MSH (p = 0.001).
Conclusion. The incidence of the relationship between the sinus wall and the posterior root apices was found smaller in the dentulous MSH patients. Also, the distance between the root apices and the sinus wall was longer in the dentulous MSH patients, and the vertical and horizontal alveolar bone was larger in the posteriorly edentulous MSH patients.

Key words

dental implant, endodontic treatment, alveolar crest, maxillary sinus hypoplasia

Słowa kluczowe

implant stomatologiczny, leczenie endodontyczne, grzebień zębodołowy, niedorozwój zatoki szczękowej

References (29)

  1. Peyneau PD, Oliveira LGT, Carneiro PMR, Manzi FR. Maxillary sinus disease of odontogenic origin. Dent Press Endod. 2013;3(2):80–83.
  2. Thiagarajan B, Narashiman S. Hypoplasia of all paranasal sinuses: A case series and literature review. Otolaryngol Online J. 2012;2(2):20–25.
  3. Kosko JR, Hall BE, Tunkel DE. Acquired maxillary sinus hypoplasia: A consequence of endoscopic sinus surgery? Laryngoscope. 1996;106(10):1210–1213.
  4. Bassiouny A, Newlands WJ, Ali H, Zaki Y. Maxillary sinus hypoplasia and superior orbital fissure asymmetry. Laryngoscope. 1982;92(4):441–448.
  5. Altun O, Duman SB, Bayrakdar IS, Yasa Y, Duman S, Yılmaz SG. Cone beam computed tomography imaging of superior semicircular canal morphology: A retrospective comparison of cleft lip/palate patients and normal controls. Acta Odontol Scand. 2018;76(4):247–252.
  6. Demirel O, Kaya E, Üçok CÖ. Evaluation of mastoid pneumatization using cone-beam computed tomography. Oral Radiol. 2014;30:92–97.
  7. Hanzelka T, Dusek J, Ocasek F, et al. Movement of the patient and the cone beam computed tomography scanner: Objectives and possible solutions. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2013;116(6):769–773.
  8. Teymoortash A, Hamzei S, Murthum T, Eivazi B, Kureck I, Werner JA. Temporal bone imaging using digital volume tomography and computed tomography: A comparative cadaveric radiological study. Surg Radiol Anat. 2011;33(2):123–128.
  9. Fakhran S, Alhilali L, Sreedher G, et al. Comparison of simulated cone beam computed tomography to conventional helical computed tomography for imaging of rhinosinusitis. Laryngoscope. 2014;124(9):2002–2006.
  10. Sirikçi A, Bayazit Y, Gümüsburun E, Bayram M, Kanlikana M. A new approach to the classification of maxillary sinus hypoplasia with relevant clinical implications. Surg Radiol Anat. 2000;22(5–6):243–247.
  11. Brook I. Sinusitis of odontogenic origin. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2006;135(3):349–355.
  12. Nash D, Wald E. Sinusitis. Pediatr Rev. 2001;22:111–117.
  13. Uvarov VM. Odontogenic Maxillary Sinusitis [in Russian]. Leningrad, Russia: Medgiz; 1962:34–39.
  14. Shargorodsky AG. Inflammatory Diseases of the Maxillofacial Region and the Neck [in Russian]. Moscow, Russia: Medgiz; 1985:15–24.
  15. Erdem T, Aktas D, Erdem G, Miman MC, Ozturan O. Maxillary sinus hypoplasia. Rhinology. 2002;40(3):150–153.
  16. Milczuk HA, Dalley RW, Wessbacher FW, Richardson MA. Nasal and paranasal sinus anomalies in children with chronic sinusitis. Laryngoscope. 1993;103(3):247–252.
  17. Ahmad M, Khurana N, Jaberi J, Sampair C, Kuba RK. Prevalence of infraorbital ethmoid (Haller’s) cells on panoramic radiographs. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2006;101(5):658–661.
  18. Kantarci M, Karasen RM, Alper F, Onbas O, Okur A, Karaman A. Remarkable anatomic variations in paranasal sinus region and their clinical importance. Eur J Radiol. 2004;50(3):296–302.
  19. Stammberger H, Wolf G. Headaches and sinus disease: The endoscopic approach. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol Suppl. 1988;134:3–23.
  20. Bolger WE, Butzin CA, Parsons DS. Paranasal sinus bony anatomic variations and mucosal abnormalities: CT analysis for endoscopic sinus surgery. Laryngoscope. 1991;101(1 Pt 1):56–64.
  21. Ulm CW, Solar P, Krennmair G, Matejka M, Watzek G. Incidence and suggested surgical management of septa in sinus-lift procedures. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1995;10(4):462–465.
  22. Thiagarajan B. Advanced anatomy of lateral nasal wall: For the endoscopic sinus surgeon [Internet]. Version 12. Ent Scholar. 2012 Sep 19. https://entscholar.wordpress.com/article/advanced-anatomy-of-lateral-nasal-wall/. Accessed on September 19, 2012.
  23. Genc S, Ozcan M, Titiz A, Unal A. Development of maxillary accessory ostium following sinusitis in rabbits. Rhinology. 2008;46(2):121–124.
  24. Yenigun A, Fazliogullari Z, Gun C, Uysal II, Nayman A, Karabulut AK. The effect of the presence of the accessory maxillary ostium on the maxillary sinus. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2016;273(12):4315–4319.
  25. Mladina R, Vuković K, Poje G. The two holes syndrome. Am J Rhinol Allergy. 2009;23(6):602–604.
  26. Gutman M, Houser S. Iatrogenic maxillary sinus recirculation and beyond. Ear Nose Throat J. 2003;82(1):61–63.
  27. das Neves FD, Fones D, Bernardes SR, do Prado CJ, Neto AJ. Short implants – an analysis of longitudinal studies. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2006;21(1):86–93.
  28. Ferrigno N, Laureti M, Fanali S. Dental implants placement in conjunction with osteotome sinus floor elevation: A 12-year life-table analysis from a prospective study on 588 ITI implants. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2006;17(2):194–205.
  29. Esposito M, Barausse C, Pistilli R, Sammartino G, Grandi G, Felice P. Short implants versus bone augmentation for placing longer implants in atrophic maxillae: One-year post-loading results of a pilot randomised controlled trial. Eur J Oral Implantol. 2015;8(3):257–268.