BackgroundThe sinus lift was first described in 1974 and it has proven to be a predictable procedure ever since. The complications of this surgical procedure are reported in the literature to be low, and can include acute maxillary sinusitis, scattering of the grafting material into the sinus cavity, wound dehiscence and Schneiderian membrane perforations. We aimed to evaluate the rate of acute maxillary sinusitis after sinus lift procedures and the appropriate management strategies.MethodsBetween 2013 and 2015, 245 dental implants were placed in 116 patients (76 males and 40 females) with concomitant bone augmentation of the maxillary sinus floor. The sinus lifting procedure was bilateral in 35 patients and unilateral in 81 patients (a total of 151 sinuses).ResultsMaxillary sinusitis occurred in 5 patients (4.3 %). The clinical signs of infection were: headache, locoregional pain, cacosmia, inflammation of the oral buccal mucosa and rhinorrhea or unilateral nasal discharge. A mucosal fistula was observed during inspection in one patient. The management included only the removal of the grafting material in 3 patients, in 1 patient the grafting material was removed together with all the implants, and in 1 patient only 2 implants and the grafting material were removed, 1 implant being left in place. The sinus cavity was irrigated with metronidazole solution and antibiotic therapy with clindamycin and metronidazole was prescribed for 10 days. Subsequently, all signs of infection disappeared within 5 to 7 days and normal sinus function and drainage were restored.ConclusionsAlthough sinus lift is regarded as a safe and reliable procedure, acute sinusitis is a possible complication which has to be managed immediately in order to reduce the risk of further complications like pansinusitis, osteomyelitis of the maxillary bone, and spreading of the infection in the infratemporal space or orbital cavity. To minimize risk, caution must be taken with all the steps of the procedure, in order not to obliterate the ostium, impairing maxillary sinus clearance.

Objectives: To assess the relationships between the maxillary first molar and the maxillary sinus floor in a group of patients referred to a dental clinic. Methods: Ninety-seven patients were recruited for this study. The distances between the examined roots (mesio-buccal, disto-buccal and palatal) as well as furcations, and the sinus floor, were evaluated using cone beam computed tomography, and grouped as follows: class 0: distance = 0 mm; class 1: 0 mm < distance < 2 mm; class 2: 2 mm ≤ distance < 4 mm; class 3: 4 mm ≤ distance < 6 mm; class 4: 6 mm ≤ distance. The Spearman’s Rank Correlation coefficient was used to test the univariate associations between furca-tion-sinus floor distance and each root class. Results: The prevalence of class 0 was the highest for the palatal root (44.33%), followed in descending order by mesio-buccal (40.21%), and disto-buccal (38.14%) roots. The highest correlation coefficient was recorded when assessing the relationship between furcation-sinus floor distance and palatal root classes (rho = 0.66, p < 0.001, n = 97). Conclusions: Altogether, the results suggest that the palatal root of the maxillary first molar not only had the closest relationship with the sinus floor, but also proved to be the best predictor for the furcation-sinus floor distance. The clinician should be aware of the anatomical and morphological details of this root, especially when taking surgical decisions

Our results provide estimates of the minimal and maximal distances between teeth and sinus, as well as the average bone density in the maxillary lateral region. It is important that evaluation of a specific patient be performed during the preoperative planning of implants.

Bulges of the most posterior ethmoid air cells into the maxillary sinus were termed maxillary bullæ by Onodi. With few exceptions, they have since been ignored by anatomists through time. Likewise, Sieur cells-the spheno-ethmoido-maxillary air cells-are uncommonly found in anatomical texts. We therefore aimed to perform a retrospective cone beam computed tomography study on 50 patients to document the possibilities of anatomic variation in the situs of the orbital process of palatine bone-a variation related anatomically with the pterygopalatine fossa (PPF) and the respective angle of the maxillary sinus. Commonly occurring pneumatizations in this situs were the Sieur cell (58 %/64 % right/left side), and the maxillary recess of the sphenoidal sinus (20 %/22 % right/left side). Alone or in combination, these determined, but not exclusively, the maxillary bullæ. Uncommon pneumatizations in the anterior wall of the PPF were also found, such as a sphenoidal recess of the maxillary sinus, and lateral (maxillary, or pterygopalatine) recesses of the middle and superior, respectively, nasal meatuses. In two different cases, non-Haller, and non-Sieur posterior ethmoid air cells were found extruded posterior to the maxillary sinus. Significant statistical association indicated bilateral symmetry of Sieur's cell and of the maxillary recess of the sphenoidal sinus. It is important to identify such variant pneumatizations on a case-by-case basis in different surgical procedures and endoscopic corridors.

The maxillary bone’s frontal process, lacrimal bone, and ethmoidal labyrinth’s uncinate process can each harbor pneumatizations, referred to as agger nasi cells (ANCs), lacrimal cells (LCs), and uncinate bullae (UBs), respectively. Different studies have failed to differentiate ANCs from LCs. We aimed at studying these 3 anatomic sites to establish the anatomical patterns that could be encountered. We performed a retrospective study on cone-beam computed tomography scans of 36 patients (72 sides); the anatomic identification was supported by bidimensional multiplanar reconstructions (MPRs) in all 3 planes and 3-dimensional volume renderings. We established 6 patterns of pneumatization as follows: (1) type I: single LCs (47%), (2) type II: distinctive adjacent LCs and ANCs (8%), (3) type III: LCs expanded as UBs (6%), (4) type IV: ANCs adjacent to LCs expanded with UBs (1%), (5) type V: ANCs expanded as LCs (27%), and (6) type VI: ANCs expanded as LCs and further expanded as UBs (11%). In a type I pattern case, we found a cell-in-cell aspect on sagittal MPRs, which was further demonstrated as being an anterolateral recess of the middle nasal meatus projected in front of an LC. Such an “agger nasi recess” of the middle meatus was not previously described. For an accurate anatomical diagnosis, computed tomography studies should use complementary MPRs in all anatomical planes, as well as 3-dimensional models, to avoid confusing ANCs with LCs and better document the drainage pathways.

Common anatomic variants of the middle nasal turbinate include its pneumatization (i.e. concha bullosa media) and its paradoxical curvature. We report here two cases of differently combined variations of the middle turbinate which were documented in cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). The first report presents the vertical combination of a double or septated lamellar concha bullosa with the paradoxical curvature of middle turbinate. This combined variant associated (coincidental findings): ipsilateral paradoxical superior turbinate and contralateral paradoxical middle turbinate, concha bullosa superior and concha bullosa suprema. In the second case was found the sagittal combination of successive anterior concha bullosa media and posterior paradoxical curvature of the middle turbinate. An ethmoidal sinolith was found embedded in lamella basalis. The contralateral superior turbinate was pneumatized. These rare findings demonstrate that sound knowledge of possible anatomical variations, supported by a complete use of the tools available for the CBCT documentation of cases, is able to enrich the picture of human anatomic variations, with a direct impact on clinical and surgical practice. The septa-containing lamellar concha bullosa and paradoxical middle concha combination is a variation that affects surgical practice.

No abstract

The transsphenoidal approach of the skull base has become a usual surgical procedure which targets the sellar, parasellar and suprasellar regions of the middle cranial fossa, as well as Meckel's cave and the clivus 1 . Anatomical studies are essential in increasing the anatomical knowledge and improving surgical performance 2 . Although pituitary surgery is traditionally within the realm of neurosurgeons, otolaryngologists became active partners in the surgical management of hypophysis to decrease rates of complications and morbidity 3 , being known that the posterior ethmoid air cells and the sphenoid sinus are surrounded by more vital structures than any other sinus 4 .The sphenoid sinus is probably the most variably pneumatized structure of the skull; its recesses are able to facilitate minimally invasive access to different surgical targets, thus it play roles in the selection of surgical procedures 1 . From a developmental point of view, the sphenoid sinus will not reach its full extension until adolescence and it may occasionally extend into the vomer, ethmoid, palatine and occipital bones, as well as in different parts of the sphenoid bone, such as the anterior clinoid process, the lesser wing and the great wing, and the pterygoid process 5 . The pneumatizations of the anterior clinoid process and pterygoid process are surprisingly common 6 .According to its sagittal extension, as related to the sella turcica, the sphenoid sinus was classified either in three, or in four types. There are authors describing sellar, presellar and conchal types of sinus, which occur in 55%, 17% and, respectively, 28% of cases 7 . This classification in three types was suggested by Congdon in 1920 8 . Other authors also considered the postsellar pneumatization 9 which can occur in more than 50% of cases 10 . There were not found differences in regard to age, gender and ethnicity 9 .The lateral recess of the sphenoid sinus was evaluated in relation to the pterygopalatine fossa, and was classified in six types: type I, in which such recess is absent in the posterior fossa wall, type II, when the recess reaches above the vidian canal, type III with the recess engaged between the vidian and maxillary nerve canals, type IV, of alar pneumatization, type V, in which the root of the pterygoid process lodges the pneumatic expansion and type VI, of combined alar and pterygoid pneumatizations 11 . aBSTRaCT BaCKgROund. The pneumatization pattern of the sphenoid sinus seems rather unpredictable, as resulted from previous