Maxillofacial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery

Korean Association of Maxillofacial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons (대한악안면성형재건외과학회)
권호 표지

CLINICAL STUDY ON KOREAN POSTERIOR MAXILLAE RELATED TO DENTAL IMPLANT TREATMENT

치과임플란트 치료와 관련된 상악구치부의 임상적 연구

  • Lee, Du-Han (Department of Dentistry, Ajou University School of Medicine) ;
  • Lee, Seong-Hyun (Department of Dentistry, Ajou University School of Medicine) ;
  • Hwang, Ju-Hong (Department of Dentistry, Ajou University School of Medicine) ;
  • Lee, Jeong-Keun (Department of Dentistry, Ajou University School of Medicine)
  • 이두한 (아주대학교 의과대학 치과학교실) ;
  • 이성현 (아주대학교 의과대학 치과학교실) ;
  • 황주홍 (아주대학교 의과대학 치과학교실) ;
  • 이정근 (아주대학교 의과대학 치과학교실)
  • Received : 2009.10.12
  • Accepted : 2010.01.04
  • Published : 2010.01.29
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose of study: The purpose of this study was to provide adequate diagnostic guideline for the maxillary sinuses prior to dental implant treatment for edentulous posterior maxillary areas. For this purpose, our procedure involves the estimation of the remaining alveolar bone height, the examination of the anatomical variation in the maxillary sinuses (e.g. sinus septum), and the evaluation of the incidence of preoperative pathological conditions in the maxillary sinuses. Materials and Methods: We selected 189 patients to undergo computerized tomography (CT) in order to account for the posterior maxillary anatomy found in patients of Korean ethnicity. We evaluated the following using Dentascan software: Remaining alveolar bone height, incidence of sinus septum, and rate of preoperative pathologic conditions in the maxillary sinus. The average amount of remaining alveolar bone height was analyzed using the student's t-test for differences according to anatomical site, and the ANOVA was used for the differences according to age group with the level of significance set at 0.05. Results: Alveolar bone heights of upper first premolar, second premolar, first molar, and second molar was 12.24 mm, 10.37 mm, 7.16 mm, and 7.15 mm, respectively with statistical significance (P < 0.05). Incidence of sinus septum as an anatomic variation was 17 out of 189 cases (9.0%). Incidence of mucosal thickening as a pathologic variation was 82 out of 189 cases (43.4%). Conclusion: In treatment planning of posterior maxillary edentulous area of Koreans, the consideration of augmentation surgery for maxillary sinus is required in maxillary molar area before dental implant installation, and preoperative screening of the asymptomatic maxillary sinuses can be regarded as a reasonable preoperative procedure in the planning of dental implant treatment on the posterior maxillary edentulous area.

Keywords

References

  1. Klinge B, Petersson A, Maly P : Location of the mandibular canal: comparison of macroscopic findings, conventional radiography, and computed tomography. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 4: 327, 1989.
  2. Lamoral Y, Quirynen M, Peene P et al : Computed tomography in the preoperative planning of oral endo-osseous implant surgery. Rofo 153: 505, 1990. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2008-1033428
  3. Miles DA : Implant radiology. Dental Clinics of North America 37: 645, 1993.
  4. Misch CE, Crawford EA : Predictable mandibular nerve location-a clinical zone of safety. Int J Oral Implantol 7: 37, 1990.
  5. Resnik RR, Kircos LT, Misch CE : Diagnostic imaging and techniques. Contemporary implant dentistry, 3rd ed. St Louis, Mosby Elsevier, 2008, p38.
  6. Tal H, Moses O : A comparison of panoramic radiography with computed tomography in the planning of implant surgery. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 20: 40,1991. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20.1.1884852
  7. Reddy MS, Mayfield T, Vanderven FJJ et al : A comparison of the diagnostic advantages of panoramic radiography and computed tomography scanning for placement of root form dental implants. Clinical Oral Implants Research 5: 229,1994. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1994.050406.x
  8. Lam EW, Ruprecht A, Yang J : Comparison of two-dimensional orthoradially reformatted computed tomography and panoramic radiography for dental implant treatment planning. J Prosthet Dent 74: 42, 1995. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(05)80227-6
  9. Chanavaz M : Maxillary sinus: anatomy, physiology, surgery, and bone grafting related to implantology-eleven years of surgical experience (1979-1990). J Oral Implantol 16: 199, 1990.
  10. Fugazzotto PA. Vlassis J : Long-term success of sinus augmentation using various surgical approaches and grafting materials. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 13: 52, 1998.
  11. Jensen OT, Shulman LB, Block MS et al: Report of the Sinus Consensus Conference of 1996. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 13 Suppl:11, 1998.
  12. Froum SJ, Tarnow DP, Wallace SS et al : Sinus floor elevation using anorganic bovine bone matrix (OsteoGraf/N) with and without autogenous bone: a clinical, histologic, radiographic, and histomorphometric analysis-Part 2 of an ongoing prospective study. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 18: 528, 1998.
  13. Rosen PS, Summers R, Mellado JR et al : The bone-added osteotome sinus floor elevation technique: multicenter retrospective report of consecutively treated patients. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 14: 853, 1999.
  14. Toffler M : Osteotome-mediated sinus floor elevation: a clinical report. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 19: 266, 2004.
  15. Wong BK. Leichter JW, Chandler NP et al : Radiographic study of ethnic variation in alveolar bone height among New Zealand dental students. J Periodontol 78: 1070, 2007. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2007.060366
  16. Percac S, Nikolic V : Influence of teeth loss on morphometric characteristics of the maxilla. Acta Stomatol Croat 25: 199, 1991.
  17. Goodacre CJ, Bernal G, Rungcharassaeng K et al : Clinical complications with implants and implant prostheses. J Prosthet Dent 90: 121. 2003. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(03)00212-9
  18. Timmenga NM, Raghoebar GM, Liem RSB et al : Effects of maxillary sinus floor elevation surgery on maxillary sinus physiology. Eur J Oral Sci 111: 189,2003. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0722.2003.00012.x
  19. Huynh-Ba G, Friedberg JR, Vogiatzi D et al: Implant failure predictors in the posterior maxilla: a retrospective study of 273 consecutive implants. J Periodontol 79: 2256, 2008 https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2008.070602
  20. Winter AA, Pollack AS, Odrich RB : Placement of implants in the severely atrophic posterior maxilla using localized management of the sinus floor: a preliminary study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 17: 687, 2002.
  21. Dodson TB : Predictors of dental implant survival. J Mass Dent Soc 54: 34, 2006.
  22. Underwood AS : An Inquiry into the Anatomy and Pathology of the Maxillary Sinus. J Anat Physiol 44: 354, 1910.
  23. Ulm CW, Solar P, Krennmair G et al : Incidence and suggested surgical management of septa in sinus-lift procedures. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 10: 462, 1995.
  24. Betts NJ, Miloro M : Modification of the sinus lift procedure for septa in the maxillary antrum. J Oral Maxillofac Surg: official journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons 52: 332, 1994. https://doi.org/10.1016/0278-2391(94)90313-1
  25. Krennmair G, Ulm C, Lugmayr H : Maxillary sinus septa: incidence, morphology and clinical implications. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 25: 261, 1997. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1010-5182(97)80063-7
  26. van den Bergh JPA. ten Bruggenkate CM, Disch FJM et al : Anatomical aspects of sinus floor elevations. Clinl Oral Implants Res 11: 256, 2000. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.2000.011003256.x