F Wagner1, G Dvorak2, R Pillerstorff1, H Traxler3, S Nemec4, P Pietschmann5, R Seemann1. 1. University Clinic for Cranio- and Maxillofacial Surgery, Medical University Vienna, Austria. 2. Bernhard Gottlieb Dental University Clinic, Medical University Vienna, Austria. Electronic address: gabriella.dvorak@meduniwien.ac.at. 3. Department for Systematic Anatomy, Medical University Vienna, Austria. 4. University Clinic for Radiology, Medical University Vienna, Austria. 5. Center for Pathophysiology, Infectiology and Immunology, Medical University Vienna, Austria.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the anatomical feasibility of palatal sinus floor augmentation. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In 100 men and 100 women, both sinuses were analyzed using computed tomography. The patients were divided into four anatomical groups according to the remaining alveolar bone height: group 1 (0 ≤ × < 4), group 2 (4 ≤ × < 8), group 3 (8 ≤ × < 12), and group 4 (≥12). RESULTS: The 400 maxillary sinuses consisted of 23.5% (n = 94) group 1, 42.75% (n = 171) group 2, 23.5% (n = 98) group 3, and 9.25% (n = 37) group 4 sinuses. Optimal anatomical preconditions for palatal sinus floor augmentations (i.e., ≥5 mm height and <5 mm thickness of the window lid) were found in 93.6% of group 1 sinuses, 73.7% of group 2 sinuses, 23.5% of group 3 sinuses, and 5.4% of group 4 sinuses. CONCLUSION: The palatal approach is feasible in 93.6% of patients with remnant alveolar height of up to 4 mm. Limitations are alveolar heights of ≤5 mm as well as great palatal thickness and thus limited dimensions for a possible palatal window.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the anatomical feasibility of palatal sinus floor augmentation. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In 100 men and 100 women, both sinuses were analyzed using computed tomography. The patients were divided into four anatomical groups according to the remaining alveolar bone height: group 1 (0 ≤ × < 4), group 2 (4 ≤ × < 8), group 3 (8 ≤ × < 12), and group 4 (≥12). RESULTS: The 400 maxillary sinuses consisted of 23.5% (n = 94) group 1, 42.75% (n = 171) group 2, 23.5% (n = 98) group 3, and 9.25% (n = 37) group 4 sinuses. Optimal anatomical preconditions for palatal sinus floor augmentations (i.e., ≥5 mm height and <5 mm thickness of the window lid) were found in 93.6% of group 1 sinuses, 73.7% of group 2 sinuses, 23.5% of group 3 sinuses, and 5.4% of group 4 sinuses. CONCLUSION: The palatal approach is feasible in 93.6% of patients with remnant alveolar height of up to 4 mm. Limitations are alveolar heights of ≤5 mm as well as great palatal thickness and thus limited dimensions for a possible palatal window.
Authors: Florian Wagner; Gabriella Dvorak; Stefan Nemec; Peter Pietschmann; Hannes Traxler; Kurt Schicho; Rudolf Seemann Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2017-03-24 Impact factor: 4.379