Evaluation of Maxillary Sinus Width and Lateral Wall Thickness Using ConeBeam Computed Tomography

Year 2021, Volume: 22 Issue: Special Issue of Dentistry, 50 - 61, 30.01.2021

Nazan Kocak Topbas , Esin Alpoz

Abstract

Objective: This study aimed to measure the lateral wall thickness (LWT) and width of the maxillary sinus using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) to prevent intra- and post-operative complications by formulating a new sinus classification.
Materials and Methods: Residual ridge height, maxillary sinus width (SW) and lateral wall thickness (LWT) were measured by analysing CBCT scans from 246 edentulous sites. The SW and LWT were measured at 3 mm and 5 mm, respectively, from the sinus floor. The mean SW was stratified by the residual ridge height (<4; ≤4 and <7; ≤7 and <10; ≥10 mm), study site and measurement level.
Results: The mean SW increased at molar sites and at sites with lower residual ridge heights. Sinuses were categorised based on the 33rd and 67th percentile SW values at 3 mm and 5 mm, respectively. The mean value at the lower boundary was 9.33 (1.85) mm, with the 33rd and 67th percentiles being 8.62 and 10.11 mm, and the mean value at the upper boundary was 11.72 (2.20) mm, with the same percentiles being 10.81 and 12.59 mm, respectively. The mean LWTs at 3 and 5 mm were 1.67 and 1.56 mm, respectively.
Conclusion: The proposed SW classification and LWT may help predict the difficulty of sinus elevation when selecting appropriate surgical approaches.

Keywords

Cone-beam computed tomography, classification, maxillary sinus, sinus floor augmentation

References

• 1. Wang HL, Katranji A. ABC sinus augmentation classification. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2008; 28: 383-9.
• 2. Baldi D, Menini M, Pera F, Ravera G, Pera P. Sinus floor elevation using osteotomes or piezoelectric surgery. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2011; 40: 497-503.
• 3. van den Bergh JP, ten Bruggenkate CM, Disch FJ, Tuinzing DB. Anatomical aspects of sinus floor elevations. Clin Oral Implants Res 2000; 11: 256-65.
• 4. Block MS, Kent JN. Sinus augmentation for dental implants: the use of autogenous bone. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1997; 55: 1281-6.
• 5. Misch CE. Maxillary sinus augmentation for endosteal implants: organized alternative treatment plans. Int J Oral Implantol 1987; 4: 49-58.
• 6. Barone A, Santini S, Sbordone L, Crespi R, Covani U. A clinical study of the outcomes and complications associated with maxillary sinus augmentation. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2006; 21: 81-5.
• 7. Pjetursson BE, Tan WC, Zwahlen M, Lang NP. A systematic review of the success of sinus floor elevation and survival of implants inserted in combination with sinus floor elevation. J Clin Periodontol 2008; 35(Suppl 8): 216-40.
• 8. 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: 647-52.
• 9. Teng M, Cheng Q, Liao J, Zhang X, Mo A, Liang X. Sinus width analysis and new classification with clinical implications for augmentation. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2016; 18: 89-96.
• 10. Velloso GR, Vidigal GM Jr, 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: 192-6.
• 11. 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: 160-3.
• 12. 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: 462-5.
• 13. Hernández-Alfaro F, Torradeflot MM, Marti C. Prevalence and management of schneiderian membrane perforations during sinus-lift procedures. Clin Oral Implants Res 2008; 19: 91-8.
• 14. Palma VC, Magro-Filho O, de Oliveria JA, Lundgren S, Salata LA, Sennerby L. Bone reformation and implant integration following maxillary sinus membrane elevation: an experimental study in primates. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2006; 8: 11-24.
• 15. Neugebauer J, Ritter L, Mischkowski RA, Dreiseidler T, Scherer P, Ketterle M, et al. Evaluation of maxillary sinus anatomy by cone-beam CT prior to sinus floor elevation. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2010; 25: 258-65.
• 16. Zijderveld SA, van den Bergh JP, Schulten EA, ten Bruggenkate CM. Anatomical and surgical findings and complications in 100 consecutive maxillary sinus floor elevation procedures. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2008; 66: 1426-38.
• 17. Schwartz-Arad D, Herzberg R, Dolev E. The prevalence of surgical complications of the sinus graft procedure and their impact on implant survival. J Periodontol 2004; 75: 511-6.
• 18. 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: 1041-50.
• 19. 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: 1859-68.
• 20. 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.
• 21. Yang SM, Park SI, Kye SB, Shin SY. Computed tomographic assessment of maxillary sinus wall thickness in edentulous patients. J Oral Rehabil 2012; 39: 421-8.
• 22. Monje A, Catena A, Monje F, Gonzalez-García R, Galindo-Moreno P, Suarez F, et al. Maxillary sinus lateral wall thickness and morphologic patterns in the atrophic posterior maxilla. J Periodontol 2014; 85: 676-82.
• 23. 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(Suppl 3): 161-71.
• 24. Raja SV. Management of the posterior maxilla with sinus lift: review of techniques. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2009; 67: 1730-4.
• 25. Woo I, Le BT. Maxillary sinus floor elevation: review of anatomy and two techniques. Implant Dent 2004; 13: 28-32.
• 26. Apostolakis D, Bissoon AK. Radiographic evaluation of the superior alveolar canal: measurements of its diameter and of its position in relation to the maxillary sinus floor: a cone beam computerized tomography study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2014; 25: 553-9.
• 27. Kim HY, Kim MB, Dhong HJ, Jung YG, Min JY, Chung SK, et al. Changes of maxillary sinus volume and bony thickness of the paranasal sinuses in longstanding pediatric chronic rhinosinusitis. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2008; 72: 103-8.
• 28. Ulm CW, Solar P, Gsellmann B, Matejka M, Watzek G. The edentulous maxillary alveolar process in the region of the maxillary sinus--a study of physical dimension. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1995; 24: 279-82.
• 29. Misch CE, Judy KW. Classification of partially edentulous arches for implant dentistry. Int J Oral Implantol 1987; 4: 7-13.
• 30. Cawood JI, Howell RA. A classification of the edentulous jaws. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1988; 17: 232-6.
• 31. Simion M, Fontana F, Rasperini G, Maiorana C. Long-term evaluation of osseointegrated implants placed in sites augmented with sinus floor elevation associated with vertical ridge augmentation: a retrospective study of 38 consecutive implants with 1- to 7-year follow-up. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2004; 24: 208-21.
• 32. 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: 292-300.
• 33. Hirschfeld L, Wasserman B. A long-term survey of tooth loss in 600 treated periodontal patients. J Periodontol 1978; 49: 225-37.
• 34. McFall WT Jr. Tooth loss in 100 treated patients with periodontal disease. A long-term study. J Periodontol 1982; 53: 539-49.
• 35. Bertl K, Mick RB, Heimel A P, Gahleitner, Stavropoulos A, Ulm C. Variation in bucco-palatal maxillary sinus width does not permit a meaningful sinus classification. Clin Oral Implants Res 2018; 29: 1220-9.
• 36. Kawakami S, Botticelli D, Nakajima Y, Sakuma S, Baba S. Anatomical analyses for maxillary sinus floor augmentation with a lateral approach: A cone beam computed tomography study. Ann Anat 2019; 226: 29-34.
• 37. Dursun E, Keceli HG, Dolgun A, Velasco-Torres M, Olculer M, Ghoreishi R, et al. Maxillary sinus and surrounding bone anatomy with cone beam computed tomography after multiple teeth loss: a retrospective multicenter clinical study. Implant Dent 2019; 28: 226-36.