OBJECTIVES: Displacement of dental materials into the maxillary sinus occurs in daily dental practice; dental implants have become a new common foreign body (FB), as implantation has become routine. The main goal of the present study was to analyze an original series of patients consecutively treated for maxillary sinus FBs. A secondary goal was to propose a decision-making flowchart on the basis of the authors' experience and a critical analysis of literature to select the most appropriate surgical approach. METHODS: Eleven consecutive patients evaluated for maxillary sinus FBs consisting of dental material were considered. RESULTS: For removal of the FBs, a nasal endoscopic approach was preferred in 5 cases, a nasal combined approach in 2 cases, an oronasal combined approach in 2 cases, and a lateral window approach in 2 cases. In 2 of 11 cases, complications were reported. A decision-making flowchart to select the best surgical approach is reported. CONCLUSIONS: The correct choice and application of FB removal techniques allow minimization of unfavorable outcomes and creation of an appropriate environment for new dental treatment. Prospective, large series-based studies will be necessary to confirm the safety and clinical efficacy of the proposed decision-making flowchart.
OBJECTIVES: Displacement of dental materials into the maxillary sinus occurs in daily dental practice; dental implants have become a new common foreign body (FB), as implantation has become routine. The main goal of the present study was to analyze an original series of patients consecutively treated for maxillary sinus FBs. A secondary goal was to propose a decision-making flowchart on the basis of the authors' experience and a critical analysis of literature to select the most appropriate surgical approach. METHODS: Eleven consecutive patients evaluated for maxillary sinus FBs consisting of dental material were considered. RESULTS: For removal of the FBs, a nasal endoscopic approach was preferred in 5 cases, a nasal combined approach in 2 cases, an oronasal combined approach in 2 cases, and a lateral window approach in 2 cases. In 2 of 11 cases, complications were reported. A decision-making flowchart to select the best surgical approach is reported. CONCLUSIONS: The correct choice and application of FB removal techniques allow minimization of unfavorable outcomes and creation of an appropriate environment for new dental treatment. Prospective, large series-based studies will be necessary to confirm the safety and clinical efficacy of the proposed decision-making flowchart.