Gogineni Subhas BABU, Shruthi HEGDE, Vidya AJILA, Renita Lorina CASTELINO, Soundarya SAKTHIVEL, Anwesha BISWAS

Incidental Maxillary Sinus Pathologies in Asymptomatic Subjects—A CBCT Study

Objective: The objective of the present study was to record the prevalence of incidental maxillary sinus pathologies in patients using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans performed for maxillofacial diagnostic purposes. Methods: This study was carried out retrospectively on CBCT records from January 2017 to July 2019. Pathologic findings were catego rized as mucosal thickening, opacification, polypoidal mucosal thickening, others (such as antrolith, septa, or discontinuity of the sinus floor), and no pathologic findings. The incidence of maxillary sinus changes and their correlation with age and gender was analyzed. Results: A total of 683 scans were identified out of which 252 cases met the inclusion criteria. Pathologies were similar across age groups with a slight male predilection. The incidence of maxillary sinus pathologies overall was 68.2%. Both sinuses showed changes in 39% cases, and 29% cases had unilateral findings while 32% cases had no sinus abnormalities. Mucosal thickening, opacification, and polyps were higher in males on both left and right sides. Females showed an increase in incidence in other findings such as antroliths, septa, and discontinuity of the sinus floor more on the right side. The results were not statistically significant. Conclusion: Incidental maxillary sinus abnormalities are highly prevalent in asymptomatic dental patients. Oral radiologists should be aware of these incidental findings and comprehensively evaluate the entire captured CBCT volume, which can help in early diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up of the patient.

PDF

___

1. Alzain L, Alzain S, Badr F, et al. Assessment of prevalence of anatomical variations and pathosis of the maxillary sinuses using cone-beam computed tomography in a sample of the population of Saudi Arabia. J Oral Maxillofac Radiol. 2018;6:45-50. [CrossRef]
2. Luz J, Greutmann D, Wiedemeier D, Rostetter C, Ru¨ cker M, Stadlinger B. 3D-evaluation of the maxillary sinus in cone-beam computed tomography. Int J Implant Dent. 2018;4(1):17. [CrossRef]
3. Malik SS, Nasim A, Mohan RP, Kamarthi N, Goel S, Gupta S. Cone beam computed tomography analysis of incidental maxillary sinus pathologies in North Indian population. J Indian Acad Oral Med Radiol. 2017;29:278-281. [CrossRef]
4. Raghav M, Karjodkar FR, Sontakke S, Sansare K. Prevalence of incidental maxillary sinus pathologies in dental patients on conebeam computed tomographic images. Contemp Clin Dent. 2014;5:361-365. [CrossRef]
5. O’Brien WT, Sr, Hamelin S, Weitzel EK. The preoperative sinus CT: Avoiding a “CLOSE” call with surgical complications. Radiology. 2016;281:10-21. [CrossRef]
6. Bolger WE, Butzin CA, Parsons DS. Paranasal sinus bony anatomic variations and mucosal abnormalities: CT analysis for endoscopic sinus surgery. Laryngoscope. 1991;101:56-64.
7. Dobele I, Kise L, Apse P, Kragis G, Bigestans A. Radiographic assessment of findings in the maxillary sinus using cone-beam computed tomography. Stomatologija. 2013;15(4):119-122.
8. Amine K, Slaoui S, Kanice FZ, Kissa J. Evaluation of maxillary sinus anatomical variations and lesions: A retrospective analysis using cone beam computed tomography. J Stomatol Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2020;S2468-855(20):30003.
9. Rege IC, Sousa TO, Leles CR, Mendonca EF. Occurrence of maxillary sinus abnormalities detected by cone-beam CT in asymptomatic patients. BMC Oral Health. 2012;12:30. [CrossRef]
10. Elwakeel EE, Ingle E, Elkamali YA, Alfadel H, Alshehri N, Madini KA. Maxillary sinus abnormalities detected by dental cone-beam computed tomography. Anat Physiol. 2017;7:252.
11. Cho BH, Jung YH. Prevalence of incidental paranasal sinus opacification in an adult dental population. Korean J Oral Maxillofac Radiol. 2009;39:191-194.
12. Ritter L, Lutz J, Neugebauer J, et al. Prevalence of pathologic findings in the maxillary sinus in cone-beam computerized tomography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2011;111:634-640. [CrossRef]
13. Hansen AG, Helvik AS, Nordga˚rd S, et al. Incidental findings in MRI of the paranasal sinuses in adults: A population-based study (HUNT MRI). BMC Ear Nose Throat Disord. 2014;14(1):13. [CrossRef]
14. Vallo J, Taipale LS, Huumonen S, Soikkonen K, Norblad A. Prevalence of mucosal abnormalities of the maxillary sinus and their relationship to dental disease in panoramic radiography: Results from the health 2000 health examination survey. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2010;109:e80-e87. [CrossRef]
15. Malina-Altzinger J, Damerau G, Gra¨ tz KW, Stadlinger PD. Evaluation of the maxillary sinus in panoramic radiography—A comparative study. Int J Implant Dent. 2015;1(1):17. [CrossRef]
16. Ha¨hnel S, Ertl-Wagner B, Tasman AJ, Forsting M, Jansen O. Relative value of MR imaging as compared with CT in the diagnosis of inflammatory paranasal sinus disease. Radiology. 1999;210(1):171- 176. [CrossRef]
17. Da Silva AF, Fro´ es GR, Jr, Takeshita WM, Da Fonte JB, De Melo MF, Sousa Melo SL. Prevalence of pathologic findings in the floor of the maxillary sinuses on cone beam computed tomography images. Gen Dent. 2017;65(2):28-32.
18. Maillet M, Bowles WR, McClanahan SL, John MT, Ahmad M. Conebeam computed tomography evaluation of maxillary sinusitis. J Endod. 2011;37(6):753-757. [CrossRef]
19. Rodrigues CD, Freire GF, Silva LB, Fonseca DA, Silveira MM, Estrela C. Prevalence and risk factors of mucous retention cysts in a Brazilian population. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2009;38:480-483. [CrossRef]
20. Bo´ sio JA, Tanaka O, Rovigatti E, Gruner SK. The incidence of maxillary sinus retention cysts in orthodontic patients. World J Orthod. 2009;10:e7-e8.
21. Rhodus NL. The prevalence and clinical significance of maxillary sinus mucous retention cysts in a general clinic population. Ear Nose Throat J. 1990; 69:82-87.
22. Ata-Ali J, Diago-Vilalta JV, Melo M, et al. What is the frequency of anatomical variations and pathological findings in maxillary sinuses among patients subjected to maxillofacial cone beam computed tomography? A systematic review. Med Oral. 2017;22(4):e400-e409. [CrossRef]