BMC Oral Health (Aug 2024)
Comprehensive sinus contour classification and its characteristics from radiographic examination: a cross-sectional study
Abstract
Abstract Objective The aim of this study was to propose a comprehensive maxillary sinus (MS) contour classification system based on the evaluation of anatomical characteristics from cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) examination and investigate the relationship between sinus contours and sinus floor elevation (SFE). Methods A total of 283 CBCT scans from patients who had single tooth loss in the posterior maxilla and underwent SFE were analyzed. The MS was classified at each tooth position. For buccal-palatal evaluation, the classification from Type A to E was narrow-taper, taper, ovoid, square, and irregular, respectively. For mesial-distal evaluation, the classification from Type 1 to 4 was flat, slope, concave, and septa, respectively. The major anatomical parameters evaluated were (1) residual bone height (RBH), (2) sinus width (SW), (3) maxillary sinus angle (MSA), (4) buccal dip angle (BDA), (5) palatonasal recess (PNR), and (6) sinus depth. Results Eleven groups of MS contour were classified after detailed calculation. Differences in the RBH, MSA, BDA, and SW among different groups were statistically significant. The narrow-taper and slope MS (A2) group had the highest RBH (8.66 ± 0.77 mm), largest BDA (79.9° ± 3.18°), smallest MSA (19.8° ± 2.01°), and narrowest SW (6.30 ± 1.23 mm). The lowest RBH was in the square and concave sinus (D3) group (5.11 ± 2.70 mm). The ovoid and concave sinus (C3) group had the smallest BDA (50.64 ± 8.73 mm) and largest MSA (74.11° ± 11.52°). The square and flat MS (D1) group had the widest SW (19.13 ± 3.69 mm). A strongly significant positive correlation was observed between the SW and MSA (r = 0.67) and a strongly negative correlation between the SW and BDA (r = − 0.65). The prevalence of PNR (mean angle: 104.06° ± 16.83°, mean height: 14.72 ± 11.78 mm) was 38% and frequently observed in the ovoid and slope MS (C2) group. Conclusion Despite certain characteristics at different tooth sites, the same tooth position was categorized differently using different classification systems, indicating large anatomical variations in the MS. The classification system proposed herein allows for classification based on general characteristics at a single tooth site, aiming to help surgeons in improving presurgical evaluation.
Keywords