Evaluation of Mediolaterally Distance of Maxillary Sinus Using Cone Beam Computed Tomography
Document Type : مقالههای پژوهشی
Authors
1 Assistance Professor, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran
2 Assistance Professor, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, School of Dentistry, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran
3 Postgraduate Student, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran.
10.48305/v0i0.2075
Abstract
Introduction: Nowadays, implant-based treatment of edentulous areas has gained significant popularity. However, in many patients who have been edentulous for a long time, changing the position of the sinus causes complications during implant placement, which is necessary to solve Many of these cases can be moved to the required extent with different techniques. This study aims to evaluate the mediolateral distance of the maxillary sinus using Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT).
Materials and Methods: This observational-cross-sectional study of 160 patients who needed CBCT imaging were selected from among those referred to the radiology department of Isfahan Islamic Azad University. A sagittal section of the middle part of each missing tooth was selected to measure the mediolateral sinus distance (sinus width). In the selected sagittal section, the residual ridge height and sinus width were measured at 5, 10- and 15-mm height from the alveolar crest. The data were analyzed using the paired t-test and Man-Whitney (p value < 0.05).
Results: The average sinus width in women was greater than that in men at the 5 and 15 mm intervals, and in the interval of 10 mm, the sinus width in women was less than that in men. The average residual ridge for women and men was equal to 9.69 and 8.27, respectively, which indicated that the amount of residual ridge was higher in women, but this difference was not significant. The premolar area exhibited the highest remaining ridge height, while the first molar area had the lowest.
Conclusion: As we move from premolars to molars in edentulous areas, the maxillary sinus tends to widen, and also, the less the remaining ridge is, we may encounter the sinus at a lower level.
Keywords: Maxillary sinus; Cone-beam computed tomography; Surgery; Oral
Materials and Methods: This observational-cross-sectional study of 160 patients who needed CBCT imaging were selected from among those referred to the radiology department of Isfahan Islamic Azad University. A sagittal section of the middle part of each missing tooth was selected to measure the mediolateral sinus distance (sinus width). In the selected sagittal section, the residual ridge height and sinus width were measured at 5, 10- and 15-mm height from the alveolar crest. The data were analyzed using the paired t-test and Man-Whitney (p value < 0.05).
Results: The average sinus width in women was greater than that in men at the 5 and 15 mm intervals, and in the interval of 10 mm, the sinus width in women was less than that in men. The average residual ridge for women and men was equal to 9.69 and 8.27, respectively, which indicated that the amount of residual ridge was higher in women, but this difference was not significant. The premolar area exhibited the highest remaining ridge height, while the first molar area had the lowest.
Conclusion: As we move from premolars to molars in edentulous areas, the maxillary sinus tends to widen, and also, the less the remaining ridge is, we may encounter the sinus at a lower level.
Keywords: Maxillary sinus; Cone-beam computed tomography; Surgery; Oral
1. Kilic C, Kamburoglu K, Yuksel SP, Ozen T. An assessment of the relationship between the maxillary sinus floor and the maxillary posterior teeth root tips using dental cone-beam computerized tomography. Eur J Dent 2010; 4(4): 462-7
2. Resnik R. Misch's contemporary implant dentistry. 4th ed. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier; 2019.
3. Garg AK. Augmentation grafting of the maxillary sinus for placement of dental implants: anatomy, physiology, and procedures. Implant Dent 1999; 8(1): 36-46.
4. van den Bergh JP, ten Bruggenkate CM, Disch FJ, Tuinzing DB. Anatomical aspects of sinus floor elevations. Clin Oral Implants Res 2000; 11(3): 256-65.
5. Tatum Jr H. Maxillary and sinus implant reconstruction. Dent Clin North Am 1986; 30(4): 207-29.
6. Boyne PJ, James RA. Grafting of the maxillary sinus floor with autogenous marrow and bone. J Oral Surg 1980; 38: 613-16.
7. Allard RH, van der Kwast WA, van der Waal I. Mucosal antral cysts. Review of the literature and report of a radiographic survey. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1981; 51(1): 2-9.
8. Sharan A, Madjar D. Correlation between maxillary sinus floor topography and related root position of posterior teeth using panoramic and cross-sectional computed tomography imaging. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2006; 102(3): 375-81.
9. Mallya SM, Lam E. White and Pharoah's oral radiology: principles and interpretation. 8th ed. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier; 2018. p. 301-21.
10. Cho SC, Wallace SS, Froum SJ, Tarnow DP. Influence of anatomy on Schneiderian membrane perforations during sinus elevation surgery: three-dimensional analysis. Pract Proced Aesthet Dent 2001; 13(2): 160-3.
11. Velloso GR, Vidigal Jr GM, de Freitas MM, Garcia de Brito OF, Manso MC, Groisman M. Tridimensional analysis of maxillary sinus anatomy related to sinus lift procedure. Implant Dent 2006; 15(2): 192-6.
12. Avila G, Wang HL, Galindo-Moreno P, Misch CE, Bagramian RA, Rudek I, et al. The influence of the bucco-palatal distance on sinus augmentation outcomes. J Periodontol 2010; 81(7): 1041-50.
13. Galindo-Moreno P, Fernandez-Jimenez A, O'Valle F, Silvestre FJ, Sanchez-Fernandez E, Monje A,
et al. Marginal bone loss in implants placed in grafted maxillary sinus. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2015; 17(2): 373-83.
14. Kang SJ, Shin SI, Herr Y, Kwon YH, Kim GT, Chung JH. Anatomical structures in the maxillary sinus related to lateral sinus elevation: a cone beam computed tomographic analysis. Clin Oral Implants Res 2013; 24(Suppl A100): 75-81.
15. Chan HL, Suarez F, Monje A, Benavides E, Wang HL. Evaluation of maxillary sinus width on cone-beam computed tomography for sinus augmentation and new sinus classification based on sinus width. Clin Oral Implants Res 2014; 25(6): 647-52.
16. Zheng X, Teng M, Zhou F, Ye J, Li G, Mo A. Influence of maxillary sinus width on transcrestal sinus augmentation outcomes: Radiographic evaluation based on cone beam CT. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2016; 18(2): 292-300.
17. Soikkonen K, Ainamo A. Radiographic maxillary sinus findings in the elderly. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 1995; 80(4): 487-91.
18. Bangi BB, Ginjupally U, Nadendla LK, Vadla B. 3D evaluation of maxillary sinus using computed tomography: A sexual dimorphic study. Int J Dent 2017; 2017: 9017078.
19. Panjnoush M, Mirzaey M, Tari M. Pre-implant linear tomography using film-screen and
Photostimulable Phosphor Plate in mandible [in Persian]. J Dent Med 2010; 23(2): 128-33.
20. Nikzad S, Azari A, Bashizade Fakhar H. Imaging in implantology: The essentials of utilizing multi-dimensional techniques in implant positioning [in Persian]. J Dent Med 2009; 22(1): 6-18.
21. Wallace SS, Tarnow DP, Froum SJ, Cho SC, Zadeh HH, Stoupel J, et al. Maxillary sinus elevation by lateral window approach: evolution of technology and technique. J Evid Based Dent Pract 2012; 12(3 Suppl): 161-71.
22. Jang HY, Kim HC, Lee SC, Lee JY. Choice of graft material in relation to maxillary sinus width in internal sinus floor augmentation. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2010; 68(8): 1859-68.
)