Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite
Year 2024, Volume: 34 Issue: 1, 18 - 24, 18.01.2024
https://doi.org/10.5152/CRDS.2023.22147

Abstract

References

  • 1. American Association of Endodontists Position Statement. Maxillary Sinusitis of Endodontic Origin; 2018. Available at: https://www.aae.org/specialty/communique/maxillary-sinusitis-of-endodontic-origi n/
  • 2. Brook I. Sinusitis of odontogenic origin. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2006;135(3):349-355. [CrossRef]
  • 3. Buser D, Mericske-Stern R, Bernard JP, et al. Long-term evaluation of non-submerged ITI implants. Part 1: 8-year life table analysis of a prospective multi-center study with 2359 implants. Clin Oral Implants Res. 1997;8(3):161-172. [CrossRef]
  • 4. Cassetta M, Sofan AA, Altieri F, Barbato E. Evaluation of alveolar corti- cal bone thickness and density for orthodontic mini-implant place- ment. J Clin Exp Dent. 2013;5(5):e245-e252. [CrossRef]
  • 5. Eberhardt JA, Torabinejad M, Christiansen EL. A computed tomo- graphic study of the distances between the maxillary sinus floor and the apices of the maxillary posterior teeth. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1992;73(3):345-347. [CrossRef] 6. Georgescu CE, Rusu MC, Sandulescu M, Enache AM, Didilescu AC. Quantitative and qualitative bone analysis in the maxillary lateral region. Surg Radiol Anat. 2012;34(6):551-558. [CrossRef]
  • 7. Golshah A, Moradi P, Nikkerdar N. Efficacy of micro-osteoperforation of the alveolar bone by using mini-screw for acceleration of maxillary canine retraction in young adult orthodontic patients: a split-mouth randomized clinical trial. Int Orthod. 2021;19(4):601-611. [CrossRef]
  • 8. Guidelines on CBCT for dental and maxillofacial radiology. Seden- texct Project; 2012. Available at: https://www.sedentexct.eu/content/ guidelines-cbct-dental-and-maxillofacial-radiology.
  • 9. Gürhan C, Şener E, Mert A, Şen GB. Evaluation of factors affecting the association between thickening of sinus mucosa and the pres- ence of periapical lesions using cone beam CT. Int Endod J. 2020;53(10):1339-1347. [CrossRef] 10. Jin GC, Kim KD, Roh BD, Lee CY, Lee SJ. Buccal bone plate thickness of the Asian people. J Endod. 2005;31(6):430-434. [CrossRef]
  • 11. Joung L, Wong R. Tanaka–Johnston mixed dentition analysis for Southern Chinese in Hong Kong. Angle Orthod. 2006;76(4):632-636. [CrossRef]
  • 12. Jung J, Choi B, Jeong S, Li J, Lee S, Lee H. The effects of exposing dental implants to the maxillary sinus cavity on sinus complications. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2007;103(5):623- 625. [CrossRef]
  • 13. Jung YH, Cho BH. Assessment of the relationship between the max- illary molars and adjacent structures using cone beam computed tomography. Imaging Sci Dent. 2012;42(4):219-224. [CrossRef]
  • 14. Kang M, Kim E. Healing outcome after maxillary sinus perforation in endodontic microsurgery. J Korean Dent Sci. 2016;9(1):28-34. [CrossRef]
  • 15. Kilic C, Kamburoglu K, Yuksel SP, Ozen T. An assessment of the rela- tionship between the maxillary sinus floor and the maxillary poste- rior teeth root tips using dental cone-beam computerized tomography. Eur J Dent. 2010;4(4):462-467. [CrossRef]
  • 16. Kwak HH, Park HD, Yoon HR, Kang MK, Koh KS, Kim HJ. Topographic anatomy of the inferior wall of the maxillary sinus in Koreans. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2004;33(4):382-388. [CrossRef]
  • 17. Lavasani SA, Tyler C, Roach SH, McClanahan SB, Ahmad M, Bowles WR. Cone-beam computed tomography: anatomic analysis of maxillary posterior teeth-impact on endodontic microsurgery. J Endod. 2016;42(6):890-895. [CrossRef]
  • 18. Leung EMY, Yang Y, Khambay B, Wong RWK, McGrath C, Gu M. A comparative analysis of tooth size discrepancy between male and female subjects presenting with a Class I malocclusion. Scienti- ficWorldJournal. 2018;2018:Article ID 7641908. [CrossRef]
  • 19. Lin L, Yifan F, Shihui H, Ziya L, Jianping G. An Analysis of the Relation- ship between the Maxillary Molars and the Maxillary Sinus Floor in Adult Patient Using Cone-Beam Computed Tomography; 2020. [CrossRef]
  • 20. Molen AD. Considerations in the use of cone-beam computed tomography for buccal bone measurements. Am J Orthod Dentofa- cial Orthop. 2010;137(4):S130-S135. [CrossRef]
  • 21. Nunes CA, Guedes OA, Alencar AH, Peters OA, Estrela CR, Estrela C. Evaluation of periapical lesions and their association with maxillary sinus abnormalities on cone-beam computed tomographic images. J Endod. 2016;42(1):42-46. [CrossRef]
  • 22. Ok E, Güngör E, Colak M, Altunsoy M, Nur BG, Ağlarci OS. Evaluation of the relationship between the maxillary posterior teeth and the sinus floor using cone-beam computed tomography. Surg Radiol Anat. 2014;36(9):907-914. [CrossRef]
  • 23. Pagin O, Centurion BS, Rubira-Bullen IR, Alvares Capelozza AL. Maxil- lary sinus and posterior teeth: accessing close relationship by cone- beam computed tomographic scanning in a Brazilian population. J Endod. 2013;39(6):748-751. [CrossRef]
  • 24. Porto OCL, Silva BSF, Silva JA, et al. CBCT assessment of bone thick- ness in maxillary and mandibular teeth: an anatomic study. J Appl Oral Sci. 2020;28:e20190148. [CrossRef]
  • 25. Rigolone M, Pasqualini D, Bianchi L, Berutti E, Bianchi SD. Vestibular surgical access to the palatine root of the superior first molar: “low-dose cone-beam” CT analysis of the pathway and its anatomic variations. J Endod. 2003;29(11):773-775. [CrossRef]
  • 26. Saruhan N. Foreign material in a maxillary sinus as a complication of root canal treatment: a case report. Turk Endod J. 2016:96-98. [CrossRef]
  • 27. Shanbhag S, Karnik P, Shirke P, Shanbhag V. Association between periapical lesions and maxillary sinus mucosal thickening: a retro- spective cone-beam computed tomographic study. J Endod. 2013;39(7):853-857. [CrossRef]
  • 28. Sharan A, Madjar D. Correlation between maxillary sinus floor topog- raphy 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):375-381. [CrossRef] 29. Sharan A, Madjar D. Maxillary sinus pneumatization following extrac- tions: a radiographic study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2008;23(1):48-56.
  • 30. Vidal F, Coutinho TM, Carvalho Ferreira D, Souza RC, Gonçalves LS. Odontogenic sinusitis: a comprehensive review. Acta Odontol Scand. 2017;75(8):623-633. [CrossRef]
  • 31. von Arx T, Fodich I, Bornstein MM. Proximity of premolar roots to maxillary sinus: a radiographic survey using cone-beam computed tomography. J Endod. 2014;40(10):1541-1548. [CrossRef]
  • 32. Yoshimine S, Nishihara K, Nozoe E, Yoshimine M, Nakamura N. Topo- graphic analysis of maxillary premolars and molars and maxillary sinus using cone beam computed tomography. Implant Dent. 2012;21(6):528-535. [CrossRef]

Assessment of the Topographic Relationship Between the Maxillary Sinus and Maxillary Posterior Teeth Using Cone Beam Computed Tomography

Year 2024, Volume: 34 Issue: 1, 18 - 24, 18.01.2024
https://doi.org/10.5152/CRDS.2023.22147

Abstract

Objective: The aim was to identify the distance between the apices of maxillary posterior teeth and maxillary sinus (MS) floor as well as the thickness of the bone between the root and the alveolar cortical plate.
Methods: The cone-beam computed tomography scans of 74 patients were evaluated retrospec- tively. Topographic measurements of the surrounding bone at the apex of all premolar and molar maxillary teeth were performed in 2 different planes (vertical and horizontal). A 1-way analysis of variance was used to determine the differences in linear measurements between each root for all tooth types and genders.
Results: The mean vertical distance to the MS floor was significantly high for first premolar roots and the lowest mean vertical distance was measured for mesio-buccal roots of second molars (P < 0.05). In contrast, the lowest buccal bone thickness was found for the first premolar, whereas the highest buccal thickness was measured for the mesiobuccal roots of the second
molars (P < .05). When gender groups were evaluated separately, it was found that the vertical distance between the apices of second premolar teeth and the MS floor was significantly higher in females (P < .05). Moreover, the mesiobuccal and palatal horizontal measurements of second molars were higher in females (P < .05).
Conclusion: It is important to have knowledge about the linear measurements and morphologi- cal features of the maxillary alveolar bone in order to carry out successfull dental practices The obtained results were expected to be beneficial for clinicians to reduce the complication, espe- cially in dental procedures involving maxillary molar region.
Keywords: Maxillary sinus, maxillary molar, maxillary premolar, topographic measurements

ÖZ
Amaç: Maksiller posterior dişlerin apeksleri ile maksiller sinüs (MS) tabanı arasındaki mesafe- nin belirlenmesinin yanında alveolar kemiğin kortikal tabakası ile kökler arasındaki kalınlığın saptanmasıdır.
Yöntemler: 74 hastaya ait konik ışınlı bilgisayarlı tomografi görüntüsü retrospektif olarak değerlendirildi. Maksiller premolar ve molar dişlerin apeksleri hizasındaki alveolar kemiğin 2 farklı düzlemde (vertikal ve horizontal) topografik ölçümleri yapıldı. Çalışmaya dahil edilen tüm diş tipleri ve cinsiyet grupları için her diş köküne yönelik yapılan doğrusal ölçümler arasındaki farklılıkları belirlemek amacıyla tek yönlü varyans analizi kullanıldı.
Bulgular: MS tabanına olan ortalama vertikal mesafe birinci premolar dişlerde anlamlı derecede yüksek iken, en düşük ortalama dikey mesafe ikinci molar dişlerinmezio-bukkal kökleri için ölçüldü (P < 0.05). Buna karşılık en düşük bukkal kemik kalınlığı birinci premolar dişler bölgesinde iken, en yüksek bukkal kemik kalınlığı ikinci molar dişlerin mezio-bukkal köklerinde ölçüldü (P < .05). Yapılan ölçümler cinsiyet dağılımına göre karşılaştırmalı olarak değerlendirildiğinde, ikinci premolar dişlerin apeksleri ile MS tabanı arasındaki vertikal mesafenin kadın- larda anlamlı şekilde daha yüksek olduğu belirlendi (P < .05). Ayrıca ikinci molar dişlerin mesio-bukkal ve palatal yöndeki horizontal ölçümleri kadınlarda anlamlı şekilde yüksekti (P < .05).
Sonuç: Maksiller alveol kemiğin morfolojik özellikleri ve doğrusal ölçümleri hakkında bilgi sahibi olunması, dental uygulamaların başarılı olarak gerçekleştirilebilmesi için önemlidir. Elde edilen sonuçların, özellikle maksiller posterior bölgeyi ilgilendiren dental işlemlerdeki komplikasyonların azaltılmasında klinisyenlere faydalı olması beklenmektedir.
Anahtar Kelimeler: Maksiller sinüs, maksiller molar, maksiller premolar, topografik ölçümler

References

  • 1. American Association of Endodontists Position Statement. Maxillary Sinusitis of Endodontic Origin; 2018. Available at: https://www.aae.org/specialty/communique/maxillary-sinusitis-of-endodontic-origi n/
  • 2. Brook I. Sinusitis of odontogenic origin. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2006;135(3):349-355. [CrossRef]
  • 3. Buser D, Mericske-Stern R, Bernard JP, et al. Long-term evaluation of non-submerged ITI implants. Part 1: 8-year life table analysis of a prospective multi-center study with 2359 implants. Clin Oral Implants Res. 1997;8(3):161-172. [CrossRef]
  • 4. Cassetta M, Sofan AA, Altieri F, Barbato E. Evaluation of alveolar corti- cal bone thickness and density for orthodontic mini-implant place- ment. J Clin Exp Dent. 2013;5(5):e245-e252. [CrossRef]
  • 5. Eberhardt JA, Torabinejad M, Christiansen EL. A computed tomo- graphic study of the distances between the maxillary sinus floor and the apices of the maxillary posterior teeth. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1992;73(3):345-347. [CrossRef] 6. Georgescu CE, Rusu MC, Sandulescu M, Enache AM, Didilescu AC. Quantitative and qualitative bone analysis in the maxillary lateral region. Surg Radiol Anat. 2012;34(6):551-558. [CrossRef]
  • 7. Golshah A, Moradi P, Nikkerdar N. Efficacy of micro-osteoperforation of the alveolar bone by using mini-screw for acceleration of maxillary canine retraction in young adult orthodontic patients: a split-mouth randomized clinical trial. Int Orthod. 2021;19(4):601-611. [CrossRef]
  • 8. Guidelines on CBCT for dental and maxillofacial radiology. Seden- texct Project; 2012. Available at: https://www.sedentexct.eu/content/ guidelines-cbct-dental-and-maxillofacial-radiology.
  • 9. Gürhan C, Şener E, Mert A, Şen GB. Evaluation of factors affecting the association between thickening of sinus mucosa and the pres- ence of periapical lesions using cone beam CT. Int Endod J. 2020;53(10):1339-1347. [CrossRef] 10. Jin GC, Kim KD, Roh BD, Lee CY, Lee SJ. Buccal bone plate thickness of the Asian people. J Endod. 2005;31(6):430-434. [CrossRef]
  • 11. Joung L, Wong R. Tanaka–Johnston mixed dentition analysis for Southern Chinese in Hong Kong. Angle Orthod. 2006;76(4):632-636. [CrossRef]
  • 12. Jung J, Choi B, Jeong S, Li J, Lee S, Lee H. The effects of exposing dental implants to the maxillary sinus cavity on sinus complications. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2007;103(5):623- 625. [CrossRef]
  • 13. Jung YH, Cho BH. Assessment of the relationship between the max- illary molars and adjacent structures using cone beam computed tomography. Imaging Sci Dent. 2012;42(4):219-224. [CrossRef]
  • 14. Kang M, Kim E. Healing outcome after maxillary sinus perforation in endodontic microsurgery. J Korean Dent Sci. 2016;9(1):28-34. [CrossRef]
  • 15. Kilic C, Kamburoglu K, Yuksel SP, Ozen T. An assessment of the rela- tionship between the maxillary sinus floor and the maxillary poste- rior teeth root tips using dental cone-beam computerized tomography. Eur J Dent. 2010;4(4):462-467. [CrossRef]
  • 16. Kwak HH, Park HD, Yoon HR, Kang MK, Koh KS, Kim HJ. Topographic anatomy of the inferior wall of the maxillary sinus in Koreans. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2004;33(4):382-388. [CrossRef]
  • 17. Lavasani SA, Tyler C, Roach SH, McClanahan SB, Ahmad M, Bowles WR. Cone-beam computed tomography: anatomic analysis of maxillary posterior teeth-impact on endodontic microsurgery. J Endod. 2016;42(6):890-895. [CrossRef]
  • 18. Leung EMY, Yang Y, Khambay B, Wong RWK, McGrath C, Gu M. A comparative analysis of tooth size discrepancy between male and female subjects presenting with a Class I malocclusion. Scienti- ficWorldJournal. 2018;2018:Article ID 7641908. [CrossRef]
  • 19. Lin L, Yifan F, Shihui H, Ziya L, Jianping G. An Analysis of the Relation- ship between the Maxillary Molars and the Maxillary Sinus Floor in Adult Patient Using Cone-Beam Computed Tomography; 2020. [CrossRef]
  • 20. Molen AD. Considerations in the use of cone-beam computed tomography for buccal bone measurements. Am J Orthod Dentofa- cial Orthop. 2010;137(4):S130-S135. [CrossRef]
  • 21. Nunes CA, Guedes OA, Alencar AH, Peters OA, Estrela CR, Estrela C. Evaluation of periapical lesions and their association with maxillary sinus abnormalities on cone-beam computed tomographic images. J Endod. 2016;42(1):42-46. [CrossRef]
  • 22. Ok E, Güngör E, Colak M, Altunsoy M, Nur BG, Ağlarci OS. Evaluation of the relationship between the maxillary posterior teeth and the sinus floor using cone-beam computed tomography. Surg Radiol Anat. 2014;36(9):907-914. [CrossRef]
  • 23. Pagin O, Centurion BS, Rubira-Bullen IR, Alvares Capelozza AL. Maxil- lary sinus and posterior teeth: accessing close relationship by cone- beam computed tomographic scanning in a Brazilian population. J Endod. 2013;39(6):748-751. [CrossRef]
  • 24. Porto OCL, Silva BSF, Silva JA, et al. CBCT assessment of bone thick- ness in maxillary and mandibular teeth: an anatomic study. J Appl Oral Sci. 2020;28:e20190148. [CrossRef]
  • 25. Rigolone M, Pasqualini D, Bianchi L, Berutti E, Bianchi SD. Vestibular surgical access to the palatine root of the superior first molar: “low-dose cone-beam” CT analysis of the pathway and its anatomic variations. J Endod. 2003;29(11):773-775. [CrossRef]
  • 26. Saruhan N. Foreign material in a maxillary sinus as a complication of root canal treatment: a case report. Turk Endod J. 2016:96-98. [CrossRef]
  • 27. Shanbhag S, Karnik P, Shirke P, Shanbhag V. Association between periapical lesions and maxillary sinus mucosal thickening: a retro- spective cone-beam computed tomographic study. J Endod. 2013;39(7):853-857. [CrossRef]
  • 28. Sharan A, Madjar D. Correlation between maxillary sinus floor topog- raphy 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):375-381. [CrossRef] 29. Sharan A, Madjar D. Maxillary sinus pneumatization following extrac- tions: a radiographic study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2008;23(1):48-56.
  • 30. Vidal F, Coutinho TM, Carvalho Ferreira D, Souza RC, Gonçalves LS. Odontogenic sinusitis: a comprehensive review. Acta Odontol Scand. 2017;75(8):623-633. [CrossRef]
  • 31. von Arx T, Fodich I, Bornstein MM. Proximity of premolar roots to maxillary sinus: a radiographic survey using cone-beam computed tomography. J Endod. 2014;40(10):1541-1548. [CrossRef]
  • 32. Yoshimine S, Nishihara K, Nozoe E, Yoshimine M, Nakamura N. Topo- graphic analysis of maxillary premolars and molars and maxillary sinus using cone beam computed tomography. Implant Dent. 2012;21(6):528-535. [CrossRef]

Details

Primary Language English
Subjects Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology
Journal Section Research Articles
Authors

Ceyda GÜRHAN This is me

Elif ŞENER This is me

Ali MERT This is me

B. Güniz BAKSI This is me

Publication Date January 18, 2024
Submission Date December 19, 2022
Published in Issue Year 2024 Volume: 34 Issue: 1

Cite

AMA GÜRHAN C, ŞENER E, MERT A, BAKSI BG. Assessment of the Topographic Relationship Between the Maxillary Sinus and Maxillary Posterior Teeth Using Cone Beam Computed Tomography. Curr Res Dent Sci. January 2024;34(1):18-24. doi:10.5152/CRDS.2023.22147

Current Research in Dental Sciences is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

29936