Maksiller sinüs pnömatizasyonu ve diş çekimi arasındaki ilişkinin radyografik değerlendirmesi

Abstract

Amaç: Posterior diş çekimi sonrası maksiller sinüs pnömatizasyonunu radyografik olarak değerlendirmek ve sonuçları hem çekim sonrası geçen süreye hem de çekilen diş tipine göre karşılaştırmak. Gereç ve Yöntem: Bu retrospektif çalışma, kök uçları maksiller sinüs tabanına yakın konumda olan en az bir premolar veya molar dişi çekilmiş 54 hastayı kapsamaktadır. Toplam 186 panoramik radyografi, standart referans çizgileri ve noktaları kullanılarak sinüs tabanındaki değişiklikleri ölçmek amacıyla değerlendirildi. Hastalar, takip sürelerine göre 0–6, 7–12, 13–18 ve 19–24 ay olmak üzere beş gruba ayrıldı. Büyütme düzeltmesi uygulandı ve takip süresi ile diş tipine göre ortalama pnömatizasyon değerleri hesaplandı. Bulgular: Maksiller sinüs pnömatizasyonu, çekim sonrası geçen süre ile progresif olarak artış gösterdi. Ortalama pnömatizasyon değerleri; 0–6 aylık grupta 1,1 mm, 7–12 aylık grupta 1,7 mm, 13–18 aylık grupta 2,1 mm ve 19–24 aylık grupta 3,9 mm olarak bulundu. Diş tipine göre analizde ortalama değerler; premolar çekimlerinde 1,5 mm, birinci molar çekimlerinde 2,0 mm, ikinci ve üçüncü molar çekimlerinde ise 2,4 mm olarak saptandı. Sinüs tabanına kökleri yakın olan ve kronik periapikal enfeksiyon nedeniyle çekilen dişlerde daha fazla pnömatizasyon gözlendi. Sonuçlar: Maksiller sinüs pnömatizasyonu, zamana bağlı ilerleyen, diş tipinden, kök–sinüs ilişkisinden ve mevcut patolojiden etkilenen bir süreçtir. Yüksek riskli olgularda erken implant uygulaması veya alveoler kret koruma teknikleri, kemik kaybını en aza indirmek ve kapsamlı sinüs yükseltme işlemlerine duyulan ihtiyacı azaltmak için önerilmelidir.

Keywords

• Maksiller sinüs pnömatizasyonu
• diş çekimi
• sinüs tabanı
• kret koruma

Radiographic evaluation of the relationship between maxillary sinus pneumatization and tooth extraction

Abstract

Aim: To assess maxillary sinus pneumatization radiographically after posterior tooth extraction and to compare the results based on both the post-extraction time interval and the tooth type. Material and Methods: This retrospective study included 54 patients who underwent extraction of at least one premolar or molar with roots close to the maxillary sinus floor. A total of 186 panoramic radiographs were assessed using standardized reference lines and points to measure sinus floor changes. Patients were categorized into five groups based on follow-up periods: 0–6, 7–12, 13–18, and 19–24 months. Magnification correction was applied, and mean pneumatization values were calculated by follow-up group and tooth type. Results: Maxillary sinus pneumatization demonstrated a progressive increase with longer post-extraction intervals. The mean pneumatization values were 1.1 mm in the 0–6 month group, 1.7 mm in the 7–12 month group, 2.1 mm in the 13–18 month group, and 3.9 mm in the 19–24 month group. Analysis by tooth type revealed mean values of 1.5 mm for premolar extractions, 2.0 mm for first molars, and 2.4 mm for both second and third molars. Greater pneumatization was observed in teeth with roots in close proximity to the sinus floor and in those extracted due to chronic periapical infection. Conclusion: Maxillary sinus pneumatization is a time-dependent process influenced by tooth type, root–sinus relationship, and pre-existing pathology. Early implant placement or ridge preservation techniques should be considered in high-risk cases to minimize bone loss and reduce the need for extensive sinus augmentation procedures.

Keywords

• maxillary sinus pneumatization
• tooth extraction
• sinus floor
• ridge preservation

Ethical Statement

The study was performed in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and was approved by the İstanbul Galata University Ethics Committee (Date: 21.02.2025, Approval No: 2025-01).

References

1. Farina R, Pramstraller M, Franceschetti G, Pramstraller C, and Trombelli L. Alveolar ridge dimensions in maxillary posterior sextants: a retrospective comparative study of dentate and edentulous sites using computerized tomography data. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2011;22(10):1138-44. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.02087.x.
2. Alayan J, Vaquette C, Farah C, and Ivanovski S. A histomorphometric assessment of collagen-stabilized anorganic bovine bone mineral in maxillary sinus augmentation - a prospective clinical trial. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2016;27(7):850-8. DOI: 10.1111/clr.12694.
3. Tan WL, Wong TL, Wong MC, and Lang NP. A systematic review of post-extractional alveolar hard and soft tissue dimensional changes in humans. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012;23 Suppl 5:1-21. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02375.x.
4. Lam L, Ivanovski S, and Lee RSB. Alveolar ridge preservation in posterior maxillary teeth for reduction in the potential need for sinus floor elevation procedures: A pilot study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2024;35(12):1568-84. DOI: 10.1111/clr.14344.
5. Sharan A and Madjar D. Maxillary sinus pneumatization following extractions: a radiographic study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2008;23(1):48-56.
6. Jung Y-H, Nah K-S, and Cho B-H. Maxillary sinus pneumatization after maxillary molar extraction assessed with cone beam computed tomography. Korean Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology. 2009:109-13.
7. Padhye NM, Shirsekar VU, Bhange PD, Nikam SS, and Marathe AS. Three-dimensional linear and volumetric assessment of the maxillary sinus following posterior teeth extraction with implications for dental implant: a split mouth cross-sectional cone-beam computed tomographic study. Journal of Dental Implants. 2021;11(1):30-35.
8. Ariji Y, Ariji E, Yoshiura K, and Kanda S. Computed tomographic indices for maxillary sinus size in comparison with the sinus volume. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 1996;25(1):19-24. DOI: 10.1259/dmfr.25.1.9084281.

9. Rosen MD and Sarnat BG. Change of volume of the maxillary sinus of the dog after extraction of adjacent teeth. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1955;8(4):420-9. DOI: 10.1016/0030-4220(55)90111-0.
10. Ariji Y, Kuroki T, Moriguchi S, Ariji E, and Kanda S. Age changes in the volume of the human maxillary sinus: a study using computed tomography. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 1994;23(3):163-8. DOI: 10.1259/dmfr.23.3.7835518.
11. Cavalcanti MC, Guirado TE, Sapata VM, et al. Maxillary sinus floor pneumatization and alveolar ridge resorption after tooth loss: a cross-sectional study. Brazilian oral research. 2018;32:e64.
12. Levi I, Halperin-Sternfeld M, Horwitz J, Zigdon-Giladi H, and Machtei EE. Dimensional changes of the maxillary sinus following tooth extraction in the posterior maxilla with and without socket preservation. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2017;19(5):952-58. DOI: 10.1111/cid.12521.
13. Schropp L, Wenzel A, Kostopoulos L, and Karring T. Bone healing and soft tissue contour changes following single-tooth extraction: a clinical and radiographic 12-month prospective study. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2003;23(4):313-23.
14. Packota GV, Hoover JN, and Neufeld BD. A study of the height of intact alveolar bone on panoramic radiographs of adult patients. J Prosthet Dent. 1988;60(4):504-9. DOI: 10.1016/0022-3913(88)90258-2.
15. Jung YH, Cho BH, and Hwang JJ. Comparison of panoramic radiography and cone-beam computed tomography for assessing radiographic signs indicating root protrusion into the maxillary sinus. Imaging Sci Dent. 2020;50(4):309-18. DOI: 10.5624/isd.2020.50.4.309.
16. Eberhardt JA, Torabinejad M, and Christiansen EL. A computed tomographic 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):345-6. DOI: 10.1016/0030-4220(92)90133-b.
17. Lim HC, Kim S, Kim DH, Herr Y, Chung JH, and Shin SI. Factors affecting maxillary sinus pneumatization following posterior maxillary tooth extraction. J Periodontal Implant Sci. 2021;51(4):285-95. DOI: 10.5051/jpis.2007220361.
18. Wehrbein H and Diedrich P. [Progressive pneumatization of the basal maxillary sinus after extraction and space closure]. Fortschr Kieferorthop. 1992;53(2):77-83. DOI: 10.1007/BF02164641.
19. Hameed S, Bakhshalian N, Alwazan E, Wallace SS, and Zadeh HH. Maxillary Sinus Floor and Alveolar Crest Alterations Following Extraction of Single Maxillary Molars: A Retrospective CBCT Analysis. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2019;39(4):545-51. DOI: 10.11607/prd.3865.
20. Vazquez L, Nizamaldin Y, Combescure C, et al. Accuracy of vertical height measurements on direct digital panoramic radiographs using posterior mandibular implants and metal balls as reference objects. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2013;42(2):20110429. DOI: 10.1259/dmfr.20110429.
21. Reddy MS, Mayfield-Donahoo T, Vanderven FJ, and Jeffcoat MK. A comparison of the diagnostic advantages of panoramic radiography and computed tomography scanning for placement of root form dental implants. Clin Oral Implants Res. 1994;5(4):229-38. DOI: 10.1034/j.1600-0501.1994.050406.x.
22. Cha JK, Song YW, Park SH, Jung RE, Jung UW, and Thoma DS. Alveolar ridge preservation in the posterior maxilla reduces vertical dimensional change: A randomized controlled clinical trial. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2019;30(6):515-23. DOI: 10.1111/clr.13436.
23. Misch CE. Contemporary implant dentistry. Implant Dentistry. 1999;8(1):90.