Is the pneumatisation of the maxillary sinus following tooth loss a reality? A retrospective analysis using cone beam computed tomography and a customised software program
- 211 Downloads
To compare the dimensions of maxillary sinuses in dentate and edentulous patients using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans and a customised software program.
Materials and methods
This study comprised CBCTs of 50 dentate and 50 edentulous posterior maxillae. The observers drew two planar curves in all included sinuses in the frontal, sagittal and axial planes of the respective CBCT scans. The volume (mm3), surface (mm2) and maximum diameter (mm) of the sinuses were calculated using a custom-made software program. The variables analysed were the influence of the state of dentition on sinus dimensions (primary outcome) and the influence of age, gender and side on sinus dimensions; the time needed for analysis; and the intra- and inter-observer agreement (secondary outcomes).
There was no difference in sinus dimensions between dentate and edentulous posterior maxillae. Males had significantly (p < 0.05) greater volume, surface and diameter than females. Strong intra- and inter-observer agreement (Pearson correlation) was found for the calculated sinus dimensions. The time needed per analysis was less than 4 min for both observers.
Being edentulous did not have an impact on the sinus dimensions, suggesting that there is no ongoing pneumatisation in the sinus after tooth loss. Males had larger sinuses than females in a population older than 30 years.
Following tooth loss in the posterior maxilla, vertical bone height is primarily lost due to resorption of the alveolar crest, and not due to pneumatisation of the maxillary sinus. The customised software program was found to be user-friendly and efficient.
KeywordsMaxillary sinus Maxillary sinus volume Dentate posterior maxilla Edentulous posterior maxilla Cone beam computed tomography Pneumatisation
The authors thank M. Gabriel Fischer, significantis GmbH, Herzwil b. Köniz, Switzerland, for his assistance with the statistical analysis.
This study was funded by a grant from the Swiss Association of Dentomaxillofacial Radiology (grant number 15/01).
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
This study was reviewed and approved by the local ethics committee of the State of Bern, Switzerland (approval number 384/14). All procedures in this retrospective study were conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki (1964) and its later amendments.
For this type of study (retrospective study), formal consent is not required.
- 3.Kittel G, Göhr H (1955) Bestimmungen von Nasennebenhöhlengrössen. Z Laryng Rhinol 44:59–66Google Scholar
- 4.Heyne HJ, Fanghänel J (1972) Zur Anatomie der menschlichen Nasennebenhöhlen. 1. Räumliche Darstellungen. 2. Volumetrie. Anat Anz 130:132–157Google Scholar
- 5.Chanavaz M (1990) Maxillary sinus: anatomy, physiology, surgery, and bone grafting related to implantology: eleven years of surgical experience (1979-1990). J Oral Implantol 16:199–209Google Scholar
- 6.Anagnostopoulou S, Venieratos D, Spyropoulos N (1991) Classification of human maxillary sinuses according to their geometric features. Anat Anz 173:121–130Google Scholar
- 8.Kraut R, Kessler H (1989) Quantification of bone in dental implant sites after composite grafting of the mandible. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 4:143Google Scholar
- 9.Smiler DG, Johnson PW, Lozada JL, Misch C, Rosenlicht JL, Tatum OH Jr, Wagner JR (1992) Sinus lift grafts and endosseous implants. Treatment of the atrophic posterior maxilla. Dent Clin N Am 36:151–186 discussion 187-188Google Scholar
- 11.Dobele I, Kise L, Apse P, Kragis G, Bigestans A (2013) Radiographic assessment of findings in the maxillary sinus using cone-beam computed tomography. Stomatologija 15:119–122Google Scholar
- 12.Bornstein MM, Scarfe WC, Vaughn VM, Jacobs R (2014) Cone beam computed tomography in implant dentistry: a systematic review focusing on guidelines, indications, and radiation dose risks. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 29(Suppl):55–77. https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.2014suppl.g1.4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 13.Bornstein MM, Al-Nawas B, Kuchler U, Tahmaseb A (2014) Consensus statements and recommended clinical procedures regarding contemporary surgical and radiographic techniques in implant dentistry. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 29(Suppl):78–82. https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.2013.g1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 15.Suter VG, Warnakulasuriya S, Reichart PA, Bornstein MM (2015) Radiographic volume analysis as a novel tool to determine nasopalatine duct cyst dimensions and its association with presenting symptoms and postoperative complications. Clin Oral Investig 19:1611–1618. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-014-1391-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 16.Kosfeld R, Eckey HF, Türck M, Eckey HF, Türck M (2008) Deskriptive Statistik: Grundlagen – Methoden - Beispiele - Aufgaben. 5. Aufl. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
- 17.Stern L (1939) Roentgenologische Betrachtung der Entwicklung und Ausdehnung der Nasennebenhöhlen. HNO 30:169–199Google Scholar
- 18.Pfyffer A (1951) Über die Spätfolgen der Sechsjahrmolar-Extraktion. Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnheilkd 61:565–590Google Scholar
- 21.Kasabah S, Slezák R, Simünek A, Krug J, Lecaro MC (2002) Evaluation of the accuracy of panoramic radiograph in the definition of maxillary sinus septa. Acta Med (Hradec Kralove) 45:173–175Google Scholar
- 22.González-Santana H, Peñarrocha-Diago M, Guarinós-Carbó J, Sorní-Bröker M (2007) A study of the septa in the maxillary sinuses and the subantral alveolar processes in 30 patients. J Oral Implantol 33:340–343. https://doi.org/10.1563/1548-1336(2007)33[340:ASOTSI]2.0.CO;2Google Scholar
- 23.Maestre-Ferrín L, Carrillo-García C, Galán-Gil S, Peñarrocha-Diago M, Peñarrocha-Diago M (2011) Prevalence, location, and size of maxillary sinus septa: panoramic radiograph versus computed tomography scan. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 69:507–511. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2010.10.033 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 25.Harris D, Buser D, Dula K, Gröndahl K, Harris D, Jacobs R, Lekholm U, Nakielny R, van Steenberghe D, van der Stelt P (2002) E.A.O. guidelines for the use of diagnostic imaging in implant dentistry. A consensus workshop organized by the European Association for Osseointegration in Trinity College Dublin. Clin Oral Implants Res 13:566–570CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 26.Harris D, Horner K, Gröndahl K, Jacobs R, Helmrot E, Benic GI, Bornstein MM, Dawood A, Quirynen M (2012) E.A.O. guidelines for the use of diagnostic imaging in implant dentistry 2011. A consensus workshop organized by the European Association for Osseointegration at the Medical University of Warsaw. Clin Oral Implants Res 23:1243–1253. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2012.02441.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 29.Sharan A, Madjar D (2008) Maxillary sinus pneumatisation following extractions: a radiographic study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 23:48–56Google Scholar