Oral radiology · 2021
Radioanatomic study of maxillary sinus palatal process pneumatization.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Günaçar Dilara Nil, Köse Taha Emre, Arsan Belde, Aydın Emine Zehra
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To perform a detailed analysis of palatal process pneumatization (PPP) on cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) images.
METHODS: This study consisted of 376 maxillary sinuses of 188 patients aged 22-88 years who had maxillary CBCT scans. The radioanatomy of the PPP was evaluated at distances 4, 8, 16, and 24 mm posterior to incisive foramen. The types of PPP were classified as follows: type I: maxillary sinus palatal process non-gasified; type II: palatal process gasification into the nasal floor, but not more than half of the width of the nasal floor; and type III: palatal process gasification into the nasal floor more than half of the width of nasal floor. Sinus opening angle (SOA), palatonasal recess angle (PNRA), palatal junction angle (PJA), and palatal depth measurement (PDM) were the evaluated parameters.
RESULTS: Among the identified 1315 PPPs, type I PPP (880, 66.92%) was the most frequently observed, followed by type II (426, 32.4%), and the least observed was type III PPP (9, 0.68%). There was no significant difference between SOA and PJA according to the types of PPP (p > 0.05). The difference between PNRA and PDM of type I and type II PPP showed a statistically significant difference (p < 0.05). Type I PPP was the most encountered with the highest PDM, and PNRA was narrower in type III than in type II PPP.
CONCLUSION: Physicians must be aware of these variations to prevent possible complications during surgery because 33.08% of the maxillary sinuses showed extensive pneumatization through the palatal process.
METHODS: This study consisted of 376 maxillary sinuses of 188 patients aged 22-88 years who had maxillary CBCT scans. The radioanatomy of the PPP was evaluated at distances 4, 8, 16, and 24 mm posterior to incisive foramen. The types of PPP were classified as follows: type I: maxillary sinus palatal process non-gasified; type II: palatal process gasification into the nasal floor, but not more than half of the width of the nasal floor; and type III: palatal process gasification into the nasal floor more than half of the width of nasal floor. Sinus opening angle (SOA), palatonasal recess angle (PNRA), palatal junction angle (PJA), and palatal depth measurement (PDM) were the evaluated parameters.
RESULTS: Among the identified 1315 PPPs, type I PPP (880, 66.92%) was the most frequently observed, followed by type II (426, 32.4%), and the least observed was type III PPP (9, 0.68%). There was no significant difference between SOA and PJA according to the types of PPP (p > 0.05). The difference between PNRA and PDM of type I and type II PPP showed a statistically significant difference (p < 0.05). Type I PPP was the most encountered with the highest PDM, and PNRA was narrower in type III than in type II PPP.
CONCLUSION: Physicians must be aware of these variations to prevent possible complications during surgery because 33.08% of the maxillary sinuses showed extensive pneumatization through the palatal process.