Evaluation of maxillary sinus using cone-beam CT in patients scheduled for dental implant in maxillary posterior area.
- Author:
Chang Shin CHEONG
1
;
Bong Hae CHO
;
Dae Seok HWANG
;
Yeon Hwa JUNG
;
Kyeong Soo NAA
Author Information
1. Department of Oral & Maxillofacial Radiology, School of Dentistry, Pusan National University, Korea.
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Cone beam CT;
Maxillary sinus abnormality;
Implant;
Mucosal thickening
- MeSH:
Cone-Beam Computed Tomography;
Dental Implants;
Humans;
Maxillary Sinus;
Prevalence;
Retention (Psychology)
- From:Journal of the Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons
2009;35(1):21-25
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to determine the prevalence of sinus disease and abnormalities in patients scheduled for dental implant in maxillary posterior area using cone beam CT. PATIENTS AND METHOD: One hundred five maxillary sinuses in eighty-seven patients who underwent cone beam CT for dental implant in maxillary posterior area were included. Any patients who had previous history of sinus operations were not included. The sinus abnormalities were classified as follows ; normal (membrane thickness <2 mm), mucosal thickening (membrane thickness > or = 2 mm and <6 mm), partial opacification (membrane thickness >6 mm but not full), full opacification and mucous retention cyst. The relationship between the remaining bone height, sinus symptoms and maxillary sinus abnormality was statistically surveyed. RESULTS: Of 105 maxillary sinuses in 87 patients, 80 (76%) maxillary sinuses showed abnormalities ; 4 of 4 symptomatic patients and 76 of 101 asymptomatic patients. Mucosal thickening was the most common sinus abnormality. Only 3 (4%) of 80 maxillary sinus abnormalities were caused by the odontogenic origin. The prevalence of maxillary sinus abnormalities was higher in the symptomatic group than asymptomatic one (p<0.05). CONCLUSION: Maxillary sinus abnormalities were very common in the patients who were planning implantation in maxillary posterior areas. This result supports that thorough evaluation for maxillary sinus is recommended when implant treatment is planned for those areas.
