Analysis of the anatomy of the maxillary sinus septum using 3-dimensional computed tomography.

Department of Prosthodontics, College of Dentistry, Yonsei University, Seoul, South Korea.
Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery: official journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons (Impact Factor: 1.58). 01/2011; 69(4):1070-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.joms.2010.07.020
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Maxillary posterior teeth exhibit a high incidence of periodontal bone and tooth loss. After tooth loss, the edentulous alveolar process of the posterior maxilla is often affected by resorption, which results in loss of vertical bone volume. Moreover, progressive sinus pneumatization leads to a decrease in the alveolar process from the cranial side. The sinus elevation and augmentation surgical technique opened a new way of anchoring endosseous implants despite discernible bone reduction. However, the surgical interventions require in-depth knowledge of maxillary sinus anatomy such as sinus septum and potential variations. The purpose of this study was to investigate the prevalence, location, height, morphology, and orientation of maxillary sinus septa by use of computed tomography (CT) and 3-dimensional imaging.
Two hundred patients undergoing implant treatment at the Yonsei University College of Dentistry, Seoul, South Korea, were randomly selected for analysis of maxillary sinus septa. CT and DentaScan (GE Medical Systems, Milwaukee, WI)-reformatted data from 400 sinuses were analyzed with the Preview program (Infinitt, Seoul, South Korea). Three-dimensional images were rendered for measurement by use of the Accurex program (CyberMed, Seoul, South Korea).
We found 111 septa in 400 maxillary sinuses (27.7%). This corresponded to 37% of the patients. Among total septa, 25 sinus septa (22.5%) were located in the anterior, 51 (45.9%) in the middle, and 35 (31.5%) in the posterior regions. The directional orientation analyses showed that 106 septa were buccopalatal, 4 were sagittal, and 1 was transverse type. The mean septal heights were 7.78 ± 2.99 and 7.89 ± 3.09 mm in the right and left sinuses, respectively.
Three-dimensional CT image analyses may provide useful information that can avoid unnecessary complications during sinus augmentation procedures by facilitating adequate, timely identification of the anatomic structures inherent to the maxillary sinus.

1 Bookmark
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Posterior maxillary region is considered to be the most challenging area for dental implant placement. Lateral window opening is the gold standard procedure for maxillary sinus augmentation in this area. The purpose of this study is to evaluate lateral wall thickness of the maxillary sinus for sinus augmentation using computed tomography (CT) in edentulous patients. Computed tomography images of 302 patients were analysed. Using the maxillary sinus floor as the reference point in edentulous regions, lateral wall thickness was measured on CT scans. After drawing a tangent line at the lowest point of the sinus floor, another perpendicular line to the tangent line was drawn at the same point of the sinus floor. Thickness of the lateral wall of the maxillary sinus was measured using 10DR implant software at 3 (R1), 10 (R2) and 15 mm (R3) from the sinus floor. The mean thickness of the lateral wall of the maxillary sinus from the first premolar to second molar was 1·69 ± 0·71, 1·50 ± 0·72, 1·77 ± 0·78 and 1·89 ± 0·85 mm, respectively. The thickness differed significantly at the R2 and R3 points. Women had thinner lateral walls at the R1 and R2 points at the premolars than did men. At the R2 and R3 points at the second premolar, the mean thickness of smokers was larger than that of non-smokers. There were no significant differences on age or reasons for tooth loss. The changes in the thickness of the lateral wall at different reference points were observed, and CT examinations may help make lateral window without membrane perforation.
    Journal of Oral Rehabilitation 04/2012; 39(6):421-8. · 2.34 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The aims of this study were to measure the distance of the intraosseous vascular anastomosis in the anterolateral wall of the maxillary sinus from different reference points, and to correlate the location of the intraosseous vascular anastomosis with the tooth position and the residual bone height of the maxilla. Computed tomography (CT) images were taken from 283 patients undergoing dental implants placement in the posterior maxilla. Three horizontal lines were drawn at the ridge crest, maxillary sinus floor, and the position of the anastomosis. A vertical second line at the center of each tooth was drawn perpendicular to the horizontal lines. The distance from the ridge crest to the maxillary sinus floor and the distance from the maxillary sinus floor to the bony canal were measured from the intersections of the horizontal and vertical lines. The residual alveolar bone height was used to categorize three groups: group 1,<4 mm; group 2, between 4 and 8 mm; and group 3, >8 mm. The residual bone height values of different tooth positions were significantly different (P=0.0002). The distance from the maxillary sinus floor to the intraosseous vascular anastomosis was significantly different between groups 1 and 3 (P=0.0039). At the molar sites, a moderate negative correlation was found between the residual bone height and the distance from the maxillary sinus floor to the intraosseous anastomosis. The distances of the alveolar ridge crest and the maxillary sinus from the intraosseous vascular anastomosis were not significantly different between sexes. Within the limitations of this study, sites with a higher residual bone height in the molar regions were at a relatively high risk of artery damage during window osteotomy preparation; therefore, we recommend taking more precautions when using a lateral approach for sinus elevation.
    Journal of periodontal & implant science 04/2014; 44(2):50-6.
  • Source
    International Journal of Morphology 12/2011; 29(4):1375-1378. · 0.21 Impact Factor