We are using cookies to implement functions like login, shopping cart or language selection for this website. Furthermore we use Google Analytics to create anonymized statistical reports of the usage which creates Cookies too. You will find more information in our privacy policy.
OK, I agree I do not want Google Analytics-Cookies
The International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants
Login:
username:

password:

Plattform:

Forgotten password?

Registration

Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 28 (2013), No. 2     15. Mar. 2013
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 28 (2013), No. 2  (15.03.2013)

Page 587-596, doi:10.11607/jomi.3007, PubMed:23527364


Characteristics and Dimensions of the Sinus Membrane in Patients Referred for Single-Implant Treatment in the Posterior Maxilla: A Cone Beam Computed Tomographic Analysis
Schneider, Adrienne C. / Bragger, Urs / Sendi, Pedram / Caversaccio, Marco D. / Buser, Daniel / Bornstein, Michael M.
Purpose: The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the thickness and anatomic characteristics of the sinus membrane using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) in patients evaluated for implant surgery in the posterior maxilla.
Materials and Methods: The study included 131 consecutive patients referred for dental implant placement in the posterior maxilla. A total of 138 CBCT images was obtained using fields of view of 4 × 4 cm, 6 × 6 cm, or 8 × 8 cm. Reformatted sagittal CBCT slices were analyzed with regard to the thickness and characteristics of the sinus membrane at single-tooth gaps in the posterior maxilla. Factors that might influence the dimensions of the sinus membrane, such as age, sex, endodontic status, and the season, were analyzed.
Results: The mean thickness of the maxillary sinus mucosa varied between 2.1 and 2.69 mm in the three locations analyzed. Fewer than half of the evaluated sinuses exhibited a healthy mucosa (49 of 138, or 35.51%). Most of the pathologic findings were flat, shallow thickenings (63 of 138, or 45.65%). Sex did not influence the thickness of the sinus membrane at the root tips of the premolars or at single-tooth gaps, but there was a statistically significant correlation in the region of the maxillary molars. No other evaluated factors had a statistically significant effect on the dimensions of the antral mucosa.
Conclusions: In the present study, sex was the only factor influencing the dimension of the sinus membrane, whereas patient age, season, and the endodontic status of neighboring teeth had no significant effect on the thickness of the antral mucosa. Future studies should address which types of mucosal thickening require interdisciplinary therapy.