World Journal of Dentistry

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Volume  16 (2025)
Volume  15 (2024)
Volume  14 (2023)
Volume  13 (2022)
Volume  12 (2021)
Volume  11 (2020)
Volume  10 (2019)
Volume  9 (2018)
Volume  8 (2017)
Volume  7 (2016)
Volume  6 (2015)
Volume  5 (2014)
Volume  4 (2013)
Volume  3 (2012)
Volume  2 (2011)
Volume  1 (2010)
Related articles

VOLUME 16 , ISSUE 1 ( January, 2025 ) > List of Articles

ORIGINAL RESEARCH

Topographic Analysis of Maxillary Molar Roots with Sinus Floor and Morphometric Evaluation of Alveolar Bone Using Cone Beam Computed Tomography

Shamali Gaikwad, Manjushri Waingade, Raghavendra S Medikeri

Keywords : Cone beam computed tomography, Cortical bone, Furcation defect, Maxillary bone, Maxillary sinus, Tooth apex

Citation Information : Gaikwad S, Waingade M, Medikeri RS. Topographic Analysis of Maxillary Molar Roots with Sinus Floor and Morphometric Evaluation of Alveolar Bone Using Cone Beam Computed Tomography. World J Dent 2025; 16 (1):32-39.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10015-2567

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 13-03-2025

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2025; The Author(s).


Abstract

Aim: The aim of this study was to evaluate the relationship of the roots of maxillary molars with the maxillary sinus (MS) floor and also to assess the buccal and palatal alveolar bone (AVB) dimensions of maxillary molars using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). Materials and methods: This retrospective observational study utilized CBCT scans of 96 individuals. A total of 384 posterior teeth, 192 first molars and 192 second molars, were evaluated to assess the relationship of maxillary molars with the MS floor, maximum buccal AVB width, maximum palatal bone width, vertical distance between furcation and MS floor, and tooth-ridge angle. Data were analyzed using the Chi-squared test, descriptive statistics, and bivariate correlation between two numerical variables. Results: Type 1 was the most prevalent vertical relationship (37.5%), with a higher frequency for the first molar. Type 1H (35.15%) and Type 4H (30.98%) were the most prevalent horizontal relationships, with a higher frequency for Type 1H in second molars. No significant difference was found according to gender or side. There was a statistically significant difference in buccal and palatal AVB width, vertical distance, furcation distance, as well as tooth-ridge angle (p < 0.05). Conclusion: The most common vertical and horizontal relationships were Type 1 and Type 1H, respectively. The mesiobuccal (MB) root of the second molar and the palatal root of the first molar were closer to the MS floor. The second molar had significantly more buccal and palatal horizontal bone width than the first molar. Clinical significance: The study findings suggest that most of the teeth showed the root apex to be located in contact with the lowest border of the maxillary sinus floor (MSF). Thus, caution is necessary, as one root of the molar often projects into the sinus. Similarly, root apices within the alveolar recess of the MSF were placed more toward the buccal side with respect to the buccal root. Therefore, prior knowledge of anatomical structures surrounding teeth is necessary before proceeding with any surgical or implant procedures.

HTML PDF Share
  1. Kilic C, Kamburoglu K, Yuksel SP, et al. An assessment the relationship between the maxillary sinus floor and the maxillary posterior teeth root tips using dental cone-beam computerized tomographyof. Eur J Dent 2010;4(4):462–467. PMID: 20922167.
  2. Misch CE. Maxillary sinus augmentation for endosteal implants: organized alternative treatment plans. Int J Oral Implantol 1987;4(2):49–58. PMID: 3269837.
  3. Ahmed A, Sajad M, Malik I, et al. Topographic relationship of maxillary sinus floor with the posterior teeth roots using panoramic radiography and cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). Ann Int Med Dent Res 2018;4:82–86.
  4. Ali SM, Hawramy FA, Mahmood KA. The relation of maxillary posterior teeth roots to the maxillary sinus floor using panoramic and computed tomography imaging in a sample of Kurdish people. Tikrit J Dent Sci 2012;1:81–88. DOI: 10.25130/tjds.2.1.14
  5. Didilescu A, Rusu M, Săndulescu M, et al. Morphometric analysis of the relationships between the maxillary first molar and maxillary sinus floor. Open J Stomatol 2012;2(4):352–357. DOI: 10.4236/ojst.2012.24060
  6. Tafakhori Z, Sheykhfathollahi M, Nemati S. Evaluating the distance between posterior teeth and the maxillary sinus floor using cone beam computed tomography. J Dentomaxillofac Radiol Pathol Surg 2018;7(4):145–150. DOI: 10.32598/3dj.7.4.145
  7. Yurdabakan ZZ, Okumus O, Pekiner FN. Evaluation of the maxillary third molars and maxillary sinus using cone-beam computed tomography. Niger J Clin Pract 2018;21(8):1050–1058. DOI: 10.4103/njcp.njcp_420_17
  8. 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
  9. Roque-Torres GD, Ramirez-Sotelo LR, de Almeida SM, et al. 2D and 3D imaging of the relationship between maxillary sinus and posterior teeth. Braz J Oral Sci 2015;14(2):141–148. DOI: 10.1590/1677-3225v14n2a09
  10. Fry RR, Patidar DC, Goyal S, et al. Proximity of maxillary posterior teeth roots to maxillary sinus and adjacent structures using Denta scan®. Indian J Dent 2016;7(3):126–130. DOI: 10.4103/0975-962X.189339
  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. Haghanifar S, Moudi E, Bijani A, et al. Relationship between the maxillary molars roots and sinus in a selected Iranian population: a CBCT study. J Res Med Dent Sci 2018;6(2):544–549. DOI: 10.5455/jrmds.20186282
  13. Kwak HH, Park HD, Yoon HR, et al. Topographic anatomy of the inferior wall of the maxillary sinus in Koreans. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2004;33(4):382–388. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijom.2003.10.012
  14. Pagin O, Centurion BS, Rubira-Bullen IRF, et al. Maxillary sinus and posterior teeth: accessing close relationship by cone-beam computed tomographic scanning in a Brazilian population. J Endod 2013;39(6):748–751. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2013.01.014
  15. Tian X-M, Qian L, Xin X-Z, 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
  16. Matsuda H, Borzabadi-Farahani A, Le BT. Three-dimensional alveolar bone anatomy of the maxillary first molars: a cone-beam computed tomography study with implications for immediate implant placement. Implant Dent 2016;25(3):367–372. DOI: 10.1097/ID.0000000000000430
  17. Lopes LJ, Gamba TO, Bertinato JVJ, et al. Comparison of panoramic radiography and CBCT to identify maxillary posterior roots invading the maxillary sinus. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2016;45(6):20160043. DOI: 10.1259/dmfr.20160043
  18. Shokri A, Lari S, Yousefi F, et al. Assessment of the relationship between the maxillary sinus floor and maxillary posterior teeth roots using cone beam computed tomography. J Contemp Dent Pract 2014;15(5):618–622. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-1589
  19. Estrela C, Nunes CABCM, Guedes OA, et al. Study of anatomical relationship between posterior teeth and maxillary sinus floor in a subpopulation of the Brazilian central region using cone-beam computed tomography—Part 2. Braz Dent J 2016;27(1):9–15. DOI: 10.1590/0103-6440201600679
  20. Gu Y, Sun C, Wu D, et al. Evaluation of the relationship between maxillary posterior teeth and the maxillary sinus floor using cone-beam computed tomography. BMC Oral Health 2018;18(1):164. DOI: 10.1186/s12903-018-0626-z
  21. Jung YH, Cho BH, Hwang JJ. Comparison of panoramic radiography and cone-beam computed tomography for assessing radiographic signs indicating root protrusion into the maxillary sinus. Imaging Sci Dent 2020;50(4):309–318. DOI: 10.5624/isd.2020.50.4.309
  22. Yoshimine S-I, Nishihara K, Nozoe E, et al. Topographic analysis of maxillary premolars and molars and maxillary sinus using cone beam computed tomography. Implant Dent 2012;21(6):528–535. DOI: 10.1097/ID.0b013e31827464fc
  23. Terlemez A, Tassoker M, Kizilcakaya M, et al. Comparison of cone-beam computed tomography and panoramic radiography in the evaluation of maxillary sinus pathology related to maxillary posterior teeth: do apical lesions increase the risk of maxillary sinus pathology? Imaging Sci Dent 2019;49(2):115–122. DOI: 10.5624/isd.2019.49.2.115
  24. Choi YJ, Kim YH, Han SS, et al. Alveolar bone height according to the anatomical relationship between the maxillary molar and sinus. J Periodontal Implant Sci 2020;50(1):38–47. DOI: 10.5051/jpis.2020.50.1.38
  25. Kumar MPS, Harshitha C. Relationship between maxillary sinus floor and the apices of maxillary posterior teeth—a cone beam computed tomography study. Drug Inven Today 2018;10:1374–1376.
  26. Tang L, Xu L, Liu H. A retrospective study on the relationship between maxillary posterior teeth and maxillary sinus floor using cone-beam computed tomographic images. J Anat Soc India 2019;68(4):253–259. DOI: 10.4103/JASI.JASI_81_19
  27. 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):030006052092689. DOI: 10.1177/0300060520926896
  28. Bulut DG, Şişman Y. Assessment of bone morphology and status of maxillary sinus in the posterior maxilla: three-dimensional analysis for implant therapy. Kırıkkale Üniv Tıp Fak Derg 2019;21(3):313–324. DOI: 10.24938/kutfd.550667
  29. Al-Shayyab MH. A simple method to locate mandibular foramen with cone-beam computed tomography and its relevance to oral and maxillofacial surgery: a radio-anatomical study. Surg Radiol Anat 2018;40(6):625–634. DOI: 10.1007/s00276-018-2015-3
  30. Kang SH, Kim BS, Kim Y. 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
  31. Mattar E, Hammad L, Faden A, et al. Relation of maxillary teeth to the maxillary sinus in normal Saudi individuals living in Riyadh. Biosci Biotechnol Res Asia 2010;7:695–700.
  32. Chan PS, Sung CE, Tsai YWC, et al. The relationship between the roots of posterior maxillary teeth and adjacent maxillary sinus floor was associated with maxillary sinus dimension. J Med Sci 2020;40(5):207. DOI: 10.4103/jmedsci.jmedsci_210_19
  33. Hameed KS, Elaleem EA, Alasmari D. Radiographic evaluation of the anatomical relationship of maxillary sinus floor with maxillary posterior teeth apices in the population of Al-Qassim, Saudi Arabia, using cone beam computed tomography. Saudi Dent J 2021;33(7):769–774. DOI: 10.1016/j.sdentj.2020.03.008
  34. Ok E, Güngör E, Çolak 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
  35. Robaian A, Alqhtani NR, Alghomlas ZI, et al. Vertical relationships between the divergence angle of maxillary molar roots and the maxillary sinus floor: a cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) study. Saudi Dent J 2021;33(8):995–964. DOI: 10.1016/j.sdentj.2021.08.004
  36. Kim JH, Lee JG, Han DH, et al. Morphometric analysis of the anterior region of the maxillary bone for immediate implant placement using micro-CT. Clin Anat 2011;24(4):462–468. DOI: 10.1002/ca.21101
  37. Adiguzel O, Belgin CA, Falakaloglu S, et al. Maxillary cortical bone thickness in a south-eastern Anatolian population: a cone-beam computed tomography study. Med Sci Monit 2017;23:5812–5817. DOI: 10.12659/msm.906229
  38. Shafizadeh M, Tehranchi A, Shirvani A, et al. Alveolar bone thickness overlying healthy maxillary and mandibular teeth: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int Orthod 2021;19(3):389–405. DOI: 10.1016/j.ortho.2021.07.002
  39. Do TA, Shen Y-W, Fuh L-J, et al. Clinical assessment of the palatal alveolar bone thickness and its correlation with the buccolingual angulation of maxillary incisors for immediate implant placement. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2019;21(5):1080–1086. DOI: 10.1111/cid.12835
  40. Jang JK, Kwak SW, Ha JH, et al. Anatomical relationship of maxillary posterior teeth with the sinus floor and buccal cortex. J Oral Rehabil 2017;44(8):617–625. DOI: 10.1111/joor.12525
  41. Wang HM, Shen JW, Yu MF, et al. Analysis of facial bone wall dimensions and sagittal root position in the maxillary esthetic zone: a retrospective study using cone beam computed tomography. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2014;29(5):1123–1129. DOI: 10.11607/jomi.3348
  42. Shi M, Wang X, Zeng P, et al. Analysis of the sagittal root angle and its correlation with hard and soft tissue indices in anterior teeth for immediate implant evaluation: a retrospective study. BMC Oral Health 2021;21(1):494. DOI: 10.1186/s12903-021-01848-x
  43. van den Bergh JP, ten Bruggenkate CM, Disch FJ, et al. Anatomical aspects of sinus floor elevations. Clin Oral Implants Res 2000;11(3):256–265. DOI: 10.1034/j.1600-0501.2000.011003256.x
  44. McNutt MD, Chou CH. Current trends in immediate osseous dental implant case selection criteria. J Dent Educ 2003;67(8):850–859. PMID: 12959158.
  45. Wagenberg BD, Ginsburg TR. Immediate implant placement on removal of the natural tooth: retrospective analysis of 1,081 implants. Compend Contin Educ Dent 2001;22(5):399–412. PMID: 11913267.
  46. Eberhardt JA, Torabinejad M, Christiansen EL. A computed tomographic study of the distances between the maxillary sinus floor and the apices of the maxillary posterior teeth. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1992;73(3):345–346. DOI: 10.1016/0030-4220(92)90133-b
  47. Georgescu CE, Rusu MC, Sandulescu M, et al. Quantitative and qualitative bone analysis in the maxillary lateral region. Surg Radiol Anat 2012;34(6):551–558. DOI: 10.1007/s00276-012-0955-6
  48. Von Arx T, Hanni S, Jensen SS. Correlation of bone defect dimensions with healing outcome one year after apical surgery. J Endod 2007;33(9):1044–1048. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2007.06.010
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.