World Journal of Dentistry

Register      Login

VOLUME 14 , ISSUE 2 ( February, 2023 ) > List of Articles

ORIGINAL RESEARCH

Relationship of Maxillary Posterior Teeth and Maxillary Sinus Floor in Different Facial Biotypes: A Cone-beam Computed Tomographic Study

Biken Shrestha, Rachana Shrestha, Hongfei Lu, Zhihui Mai, Lin Chen, Zheng Chen, Hong Ai

Keywords : Cone-beam computed tomography, Cross-sectional study, Facial biotypes, Maxillary sinus

Citation Information : Shrestha B, Shrestha R, Lu H, Mai Z, Chen L, Chen Z, Ai H. Relationship of Maxillary Posterior Teeth and Maxillary Sinus Floor in Different Facial Biotypes: A Cone-beam Computed Tomographic Study. World J Dent 2023; 14 (2):122-127.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10015-2187

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 17-04-2023

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2023; The Author(s).


Abstract

Aim: To investigate the relationship of maxillary posterior teeth to maxillary sinus in different facial biotypes by using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). Materials and methods: In this cross-sectional study, 99 subjects were divided into three facial biotypes—leptoprosopic (LP), mesoprosopic, and euryprosopic facial types. From CBCT images, distances from maxillary posterior roots apices to the sinus floor maxillary posterior roots apices to sinus distance (MSD) were measured and the relationship of each root to maxillary sinus was evaluated using New Net Technologies (NNT) software. Results: Altogether, 1,584 roots of 99 subjects with a mean age of 26.45 ± 6.78 years met the inclusion criteria. Mesoprosopic facial biotypes have significantly lesser MSD than euryprosopic facial types for palatal (P) root of first molar, mesiobuccal (MB), and distobuccal (DB) root of second molar (p < 0.05). Similarly, the LP facial biotypes have significantly lesser MSD than euryprosopic facial biotype for the P root of the first molar and DB root of the second molar (p < 0.05). The mesoprosopic facial biotype has the highest frequency of roots that touch or protrude the sinus (58.1%), followed by LP (45.5%) and euryprosopic (40.1%) facial biotypes. Males have significantly lesser MSD than females for the P root of the first molar, P root of the second molar, and MB root of the second molar (p < 0.05) and have a higher frequency of roots that protrude or touch the sinus (males, 52.5%; females 38.8%). Conclusion: The MSDs and frequency of roots touching or protruding the maxillary sinus vary with different facial biotypes. Mesoprosopic facial biotypes and males tend to have the least MSD and the highest frequency of roots that touch or protrude the maxillary sinus floor (MSF). Clinical significance: These inferences have several implications in dentistry, including root canal therapy, endodontic surgeries, oral surgery, and orthodontics tooth movement and placement of miniscrews.


PDF Share
  1. Mcgrowan DA B, James J, editor. The maxillary sinus and its dental implications. London, United Kingdom: Wright; 1993.
  2. Sharan A, Madjar D. Maxillary sinus pneumatization following extractions: a radiographic study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2008;23(1):48–56.
  3. Ariji Y, Kuroki T, Moriguchi S, et al. Age changes in the volume of the human maxillary sinus: a study using computed tomography. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1994;23(3):163–168. DOI: 10.1259/dmfr.23.3.7835518
  4. Oz AZ, Oz AA, El H, et al. Maxillary sinus volume in patients with impacted canines. Angle Orthod 2017;87(1):25–32. DOI: 10.2319/122915-895.1
  5. Hamdy RM, Abdel-Wahed N. Three-dimensional linear and volumetric analysis of maxillary sinus pneumatization. J Adv Res 2014;5(3):387–395. DOI: 10.1016/j.jare.2013.06.006
  6. Sharan A, Madjar D. Correlation between maxillary sinus floor topography and related root position of posterior teeth using panoramic and cross-sectional computed tomography imaging. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2006;102(3):375–381. DOI: 10.1016/j.tripleo.2005.09.031
  7. Williams RP, Rinchuse DJ, Zullo TG, et al. Perceptions of midline deviations among different facial types. Am J Orthodont and Dentofacial Orthop 2014;145(2):249–255. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2013.02.034
  8. Franco FC, de Araujo TM, Vogel CJ, et al. Brachycephalic, dolichocephalic and mesocephalic: is it appropriate to describe the face using skull patterns?. Dental Press J Orthod 2013;18(3):159–163. DOI: 10.1590/s2176-94512013000300025
  9. Sarment D. Cone-beam Computed Tomography: Oral and maxillofacial Diagnosis and Applications. 1st ed. Iowa, USA: Wiley Blackwell; 2014.
  10. Makris LML, Devito KL, D'Addazio PSS, et al. Relationship of maxillary posterior roots to the maxillary sinus and cortical bone: a cone-beam computed tomographic study. Gen Dent 2020;68(2):e1–e4.
  11. Razumova S, Brago A, Howijieh A, et al. Evaluation of the relationship between the maxillary sinus floor and the root apices of the maxillary posterior teeth using cone-beam computed tomographic scanning. J Conserv Dent 2019;22(2):139–143. DOI: 10.4103/JCD.JCD_530_18
  12. Zhang X, Li Y, Zhang Y, et al. Investigating the anatomical relationship between the maxillary molars and the sinus floor in a Chinese population using cone-beam computed tomography. BMC Oral Health 2019;19(1):282. DOI: 10.1186/s12903-019-0969-0
  13. Junqueira RB, Souza-Nunes LA, Scalioni FAR, et al. Anatomical evaluation of the relationship between the maxillary posterior teeth and maxillary sinus. Gen Dent 2020;68(1):66–71.
  14. Oishi S, Ishida Y, Matsumura T, et al. A cone-beam computed tomographic assessment of the proximity of the maxillary canine and posterior teeth to the maxillary sinus floor: lessons from 4778 roots. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2020;157(6):792–802. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2019.06.018
  15. Pei J, Liu J, Chen Y, et al. Relationship between maxillary posterior molar roots and the maxillary sinus floor: cone-beam computed tomography analysis of a western Chinese population. J Int Med Res 2020;48(6):300060520926896. DOI: 10.1177/0300060520926896
  16. Tian XM, Qian L, Xin XZ, et al. An analysis of the proximity of maxillary posterior teeth to the maxillary sinus using cone-beam computed tomography. J Endod 2016;42(3):371–377. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2015.10.017
  17. Shrestha B, Shrestha R, Lin T, et al. Evaluation of maxillary sinus volume in different craniofacial patterns: a CBCT study. Oral Radiol 2021;37(4):647–652. DOI: 10.1007/s11282-020-00506-2
  18. Celikoglu M, Bayram M, Sekerci AE, et al. Comparison of pharyngeal airway volume among different vertical skeletal patterns: a cone-beam computed tomography study. Angle Orthod 2014;84(5):782–787. DOI: 10.2319/101013-748.1
  19. Costea MC, Bondor CI, Muntean A, et al. Proximity of the roots of posterior teeth to the maxillary sinus in different facial biotypes. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2018;154(3):346–355. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2018.01.006
  20. Ahn NL, Park HS. Differences in distances between maxillary posterior root apices and the sinus floor according to skeletal pattern. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2017;152(6):811–819. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2017.05.021
  21. Kosumarl W, Patanaporn V, Jotikasthira D, et al. Distances from the root apices of posterior teeth to the maxillary sinus and mandibular canal in patients with skeletal open bite: a cone-beam computed tomography study. Imaging Sci Dent 2017;47(3):157–564. DOI: 10.5624/isd.2017.47.3.157
  22. Son WS, Kim YI, Kim SS, et al. Anatomical relationship between the maxillary posterior teeth and the sinus floor according to an anterior overbite. Orthod Craniofac Res 2020;23(2):160–165. DOI: 10.1111/ocr.12354
  23. Kang SH, Kim BS, Kim Y, et al. Proximity of posterior teeth to the maxillary sinus and buccal bone thickness: a biometric assessment using cone-beam computed tomography. J Endod 2015;41(11):1839–1846. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2015.08.011
  24. Ok E, Güngör E, Colak M, et al. Evaluation of the relationship between the maxillary posterior teeth and the sinus floor using cone-beam computed tomography. Surg Radiol Anat 2014;36(9):907–914. DOI: 10.1007/s00276-014-1317-3
  25. Ahmed M, Shaikh A, Fida M, et al. Diagnostic performance of various cephalometric parameters for the assessment of vertical growth pattern. Dental Press J Orthod 2016;21(4):41–49. DOI: 10.1590/2177-6709.21.4.041-049.oar
  26. Park JH, Tai K, Kanao A, et al. Space closure in the maxillary posterior area through the maxillary sinus. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2014;145(1):95–102. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2012.07.020
  27. Oh H, Herchold K, Hannon S, et al. Orthodontic tooth movement through the maxillary sinus in an adult with multiple missing teeth. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2014;146(4):493–505. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2014.03.025
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.