Diagnosing odontogenic sinusitis of endodontic origin: A multidisciplinary literature review

Dental Pathophysiology of Odontogenic Sinusitis: Endodontic Infections

Bacterial odontogenic sinusitis (ODS) arises from maxillary dental issues or oral procedures, and affects at least the maxillary sinuses, with or without other paranasal sinus involvement. It has been historically underreported, in contrast to more recent findings attributing 25-40% of chronic maxillary sinusitis to dental causes. Endodontic infections represent one of the most common causes of ODS. Endodontic factors like root canal infection and microbial proximity to sinus cavities play pivotal roles. Host immunological responses further shape disease severity and progression. This article aims to explore the complexity of endodontic infections that cause ODS, elucidating anatomical, microbial, and immunological aspects.

Imaging of Odontogenic Sinusitis

Odontogenic sinusitis (ODS) has been shown to be the most common cause of unilateral maxillary sinus opacification on computed tomography scans. Review of the maxillary alveolar ridge and maxillary tooth roots, and their relationships to the maxillary sinus floor is essential when interpreting paranasal sinus imaging. In recent years, ODS has received increased attention in the recent otolaryngologic and dental literature. This article will discuss technical considerations to optimize imaging of the paranasal sinuses and maxillary dentition, as well as both classic and nuanced radiologic findings of ODS.

Sinus Evaluation for Odontogenic Sinusitis

This article summarizes how to diagnose common and nuanced cases of odontogenic sinusitis (ODS) through a collaborative approach between otolaryngologists and dental specialists, with a heightened focus on the role of otolaryngologists in the diagnostic process. A critical part of the diagnostic framework is that otolaryngologists must confirm the infectious sinusitis but also suspect ODS to ensure he or she refers the patient to a dental specialist to confirm or refute ipsilateral infectious maxillary dental pathology. To confirm the purulent sinusitis of ODS, nasal endoscopy is most critical. Computed tomography imaging is an important part of the workup.

Sinus irrigation as an adjunctive therapy for odontogenic maxillary sinusitis - an in-depth analysis

BACKGROUND

Odontogenic maxillary sinusitis (OMS) is widely acknowledged in both the dentistry and otolaryngology fields. Recently, iatrogenic odontogenic maxillary sinusitis cases can be encountered frequently. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of intraoral sinus irrigation using the small lateral window approach in patients with odontogenic maxillary sinusitis by comparing pre- and postoperative volumetric measurement of CBCT and symptoms. We surveyed 21 patients who visited the Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Department at PNUDH from 2016 to 2022. All the patients' information was extracted from an electronic database. The patients with a follow-up period of 2 months or more were included. The three-dimensional volumetric measurement was performed using the ImageJ program (National Institute of Health, University of Wisconsin).

RESULTS

Among 21 patients, 16 (76.1%) were male, and 5 (23%) were female. The most common type of surgery was general anesthesia (16 cases) in which oroantral fistula was present in 7 cases. In the causes of maxillary sinusitis, there were seven implant-related patients, five patients of tooth extraction, seven patients of bone grafting, and two patients in other groups. Radiographic opacity decreased by 40.15% after sinus irrigation especially in bone graft and tooth extraction cases. Clinically, symptoms improved in 17 patients (80.9%).

CONCLUSION

By this study, it can be concluded that maxillary sinus irrigation using the small lateral window approach is a clinically and radiologically effective treatment method for odontogenic maxillary sinusitis.

Perforating dental implants and maxillary sinus pathology

OBJECTIVES

To study the association between perforation dental implants into the maxillary sinus cavity and the development of sinus pathology.

METHODS

We retrospectively examined 3732 computerized tomography (CT) scans to detect maxillary implants. The detected scans were grouped based on apparent or lack of perforated dental implants in the maxillary sinus (study and control group, respectively). Clinical data was gathered including the CT indication, patients' demographics, comorbidities and medications, implant features, and the radiographic appearance of the maxillary sinuses. We conducted a logistic regression to identify risk factors to develop radiopaque thickening in the sinuses.

RESULTS

Included in the study were 198 patients with 719 maxillary implants; of these, 236 and 483 implants were in the study and control groups, respectively. Sinus opacification was associated with implants' perforations (p < 0.001), diameter, and side and place (p < 0.05). Implants' perforation (OR = 3.679; 95% CI = 1.891-7.157) and diameter (OR = 1.608; 95% CI = 1.067-2.424), sinus floor augmentation (OR = 2.341; 95% CI = 1.087-5.042), male gender (OR = 2.703; 95% CI = 1.407-5.192), and smoking (OR = 6.073; 95% CI = 2.911-12.667) were associated with ipsilateral sinus fullness.

CONCLUSIONS

A first large study on the association between maxillary dental implant and sinus pathology. Dental implant perforation is associated with sinus opacification. Considering dental implant diameter, rather than vertical depth of penetration into the sinus, as an important criterion when examining perforated dental implants necessitates a new approach to clinical decision-making.

Pediatric Odontogenic Sinusitis: A Systematic Review

Background: Pediatric odontogenic sinusitis (PODS) is a rare condition with limited research on its clinical features, diagnostic criteria, and treatment options. The current guidelines on pediatric rhinosinusitis do not mention a possible dental origin of the disease. This systematic review aims to summarize and analyze the existing literature on PODS, focusing on epidemiology, etiology, diagnostic tools, complications, treatment options, and outcomes. Methods: A systematic review was conducted following PRISMA reporting guidelines. Electronic searches were performed in multiple databases using keywords related to PODS and therapeutic strategies. Original articles reporting data on treatment outcomes for PODS were included. Results: The review highlighted the scarcity of high-quality evidence on PODS. The literature mainly consists of case reports and low-grade evidence studies. Limited data on the epidemiology, etiology, diagnostic tools, complications, and treatment outcomes of PODS in children are available. Conclusions: Further research is needed to better understand the clinical features, diagnosis, and treatment of PODS in pediatric patients. High-quality studies are required to establish evidence-based guidelines for the management of this condition, especially given the apparently high rate of complications when compared to adult ODS.

Simultaneous management of chronic maxillary sinusitis from dental origin and the relevance of nasal septal deviation: A retrospective evaluation of 65 cases

PURPOSE

Dental origin constitutes most chronic unilateral maxillary sinusitis (CMS) and is referred to as dental chronic maxillary sinusitis (DCMS). Recently, dental implants and related surgical procedures have become more prevalent. We present an evaluation of the simultaneous treatment of DCMS.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective review of records from 395 patients with CMS treated at our medical center from 2015 to 2020 found 65 patients diagnosed with DCMS. Statistical analyses were performed using the records data.

RESULTS

Four patients were excluded. The final study population included 35 males and 26 females with a mean age of 55. 29 % were post-dental implant placement or related pre-prosthetic procedures. Presenting symptoms included middle meatus edema (72 %), pus in the middle meatus (70 %), and nasal secretion (39 %). Clinical findings included septal deviation (39 %), among them 87 % deviated toward the diseased sinus, OAF (49 %), and nasal polyposis (16 %). In 32 patients, the OAF was closed in one layer using a local mucoperiosteal flap. In 29 patients, the closure was done in two layers, including a buccal fat pad (BFP) regional flap. One patient had a reopened OAF, and five patients required revision surgery. 92 % of patients in this study had complete clinical and radiological resolution of the DCMS.

CONCLUSIONS

Relevance of nasal septal deviation in association with DCMS is present. There is no distinct difference in the manner of OAF closure if it is done in a simultaneous procedure. One stage combined multidisciplinary surgical procedure is sufficient to treat DCMS.

Expert consensus on odontogenic maxillary sinusitis multi-disciplinary treatment

ABSTARCT

Odontogenic maxillary sinusitis (OMS) is a subtype of maxillary sinusitis (MS). It is actually inflammation of the maxillary sinus that secondary to adjacent infectious maxillary dental lesion. Due to the lack of unique clinical features, OMS is difficult to distinguish from other types of rhinosinusitis. Besides, the characteristic infectious pathogeny of OMS makes it is resistant to conventional therapies of rhinosinusitis. Its current diagnosis and treatment are thus facing great difficulties. The multi-disciplinary cooperation between otolaryngologists and dentists is absolutely urgent to settle these questions and to acquire standardized diagnostic and treatment regimen for OMS. However, this disease has actually received little attention and has been underrepresented by relatively low publication volume and quality. Based on systematically reviewed literature and practical experiences of expert members, our consensus focuses on characteristics, symptoms, classification and diagnosis of OMS, and further put forward multi-disciplinary treatment decisions for OMS, as well as the common treatment complications and relative managements. This consensus aims to increase attention to OMS, and optimize the clinical diagnosis and decision-making of OMS, which finally provides evidence-based options for OMS clinical management.

Diagnosis of Odontogenic Maxillary Sinusitis by Cone-beam Computed Tomography: A Critical Review

INTRODUCTION

This review aims to provide an up-to-date overview of the current applications of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and other imaging modalities in diagnosing odontogenic maxillary sinusitis (OMS). Furthermore, the clinical operation procedures of radiography modalities in OMS diagnosis were summarized, with the goal of assisting clinicians in improving OMS diagnostic accuracy in clinical practice.

METHOD

A comprehensive review of researches that discussed the applications of radiography modalities in the diagnosis of OMS was conducted. Pertinent information was evaluated and organized for this review.

RESULTS

Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) offers a superior, high-resolution, and three-dimensional view of the maxillary tooth-bone-sinus complex compared to conventional radiography modalities. It enables a better understanding and classification of the spatial relationships between root apices/periapical lesions and maxillary sinus. The use of CBCT, combined with the advantages of other radiography modalities and proper image interpretation, is indispensable to enhance OMS diagnostic accuracy and mitigate the risk of missed or misdiagnosis.

CONCLUSION

The significance of CBCT in the diagnosis of oral and maxillofacial conditions has garnered widespread recognition. It provides highly precise diagnostic information and classification basis for OMS. The clinical operation procedures for imaging examination are essential in ensuring the consistency and reliability of the diagnosis.

Total times to treatment completion and clinical outcomes in odontogenic sinusitis

BACKGROUND

Multidisciplinary collaboration is essential for effective odontogenic sinusitis (ODS) management. One point of debate has been the optimal timing of primary dental treatment and endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS), but differences in time to completion of these treatment pathways have not been studied.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted on ODS patients from 2015 to 2022. Demographic and clinical variables were recorded, and various durations of time were analyzed from rhinologic consultation through treatment completion. Resolution of sinusitis symptoms and purulence on endoscopy was also recorded.

RESULTS

Eighty-nine ODS patients were analyzed (47.2 % male, median 59 years-old). Of the 89 ODS patients, 56 had treatable dental pathology, and 33 had no treatable dental pathology. Median time to treatment completion for all patients was 103 days. Of 56 ODS patients with treatable dental pathology, 33 had primary dental treatment, and 27 (81 %) required secondary ESS. In patients who underwent primary dental treatment followed by ESS, median time from initial evaluation to treatment completion was 236.0 days. If ESS was pursued primarily followed by dental treatment, median time from initial evaluation to treatment completion was 112.0 days, which was significantly shorter than if dental treatment was pursued primarily (p = 0.002). Overall symptomatic and endoscopic resolution was 97.8 %.

CONCLUSIONS

After dental and sinus surgical treatment, ODS patients experienced 97.8 % resolution of symptoms and purulence on endoscopy. In patients with ODS due to treatable dental pathology, primary ESS followed by dental treatment resulted in a shorter overall treatment duration than primary dental treatment followed by ESS.

Sinus culture differences in patients with radiographic evidence of odontogenic disease

PURPOSE

Odontogenic sinusitis is a well-known entity with a different pathogenesis than chronic rhinosinusitis. Nonspecific symptoms can make diagnosis difficult. This study aims to compare culture results between patients with and without computed tomography findings indicative of possible odontogenic disease.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study in which patients undergoing endoscopic sinus surgery for chronic sinusitis over a three-year period at a single institution were reviewed. CT imaging was reviewed for evidence of dental disease, specifically periapical lucency, dehiscence of the floor of the maxillary sinus, oroantral fistula, or foreign body. Culture results were then assessed and compared between groups with CT evidence of a possible odontogenic source to those without.

RESULTS

Overall, 231 patients were evaluated. 92 patients (39.8 %) were found to have evidence of a likely odontogenic source on CT. Cultures were available for 118 of 231 patients (51.1 %). Patients with CT signs of odontogenic disease were significantly more likely to grow Proteus mirabilis (p = 0.018) and Klebsiella pneumoniae (p = 0.037) on culture. Patients without CT signs of odontogenic sources were significantly more likely to grow Pseudomonas aeruginosa (p = 0.009). Of note, patients with CT findings concerning for an odontogenic source were also more likely to grow fungi other than Aspergillus and Mucor species on culture (p = 0.004).

CONCLUSION

Patients with CT findings concerning for an odontogenic source of sinus disease showed differences in culture results that could be important in differentiating pathogenesis of sinus disease.

Global Prevalence of Maxillary Sinusitis of Odontogenic Origin and Associated Factors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

The overall prevalence of maxillary sinusitis of odontogenic origin (MSOO) is still unknown. Therefore, this study aimed to determine the pooled prevalence of MSOO and verify associations between different odontogenic conditions and MSOO.

METHODS

Six electronic databases and the gray literature were searched on August 25, 2022. Two independent reviewers selected observational studies reporting the prevalence of MSOO and associated conditions in adults. Studies that did not use computed tomography for diagnosis were excluded. The methodological quality of the studies was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist for Cross-Sectional Studies. Data were analyzed by proportion and association meta-analyses. The certainty of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight studies were included in the qualitative analysis and thirty-one in the meta-analyses. Only 12 studies (31.6%) fulfilled all items of the methodological quality checklist. Overall, the studies reported prevalence measures per maxillary sinus or patient. Thus, the pooled prevalence of MSOO was 51% per sinus (95% confidence interval [CI] [40%-61%]) and 50% per patient (95% CI [41%-59%]). Apical lesion (odds ratio [OR]: 4.03, 95% CI [2.26-7.19]), periodontitis (OR: 5.49, 95% CI [2.27-13.24]), moderate (OR: 2.57, 95% CI [1.85-3.57]) and severe bone loss (OR: 13.80, 95% CI [2.81-67.85] were significantly associated with MSOO. The certainty of the evidence for the associations was very low.

CONCLUSIONS

The pooled prevalence of MSOO on computed tomography assessment was 51% per maxillary sinus and 50% per patient. Therefore, half of the maxillary sinusitis may be of odontogenic origin. Apical lesion, periodontitis, and moderate and severe bone loss were significantly associated with MSOO.

Changes in sinus mucosal thickening in the course of tooth extraction and lateral sinus augmentation with surgical drainage: A cone-beam computed tomographic study

OBJECTIVES

The objective of the study was to evaluate the radiographic changes in sinus mucosal thickness (SMT) in patients with mucosal thickening of odontogenic origin after maxillary molar extraction and lateral sinus augmentation with simultaneous surgical drainage and implant placement.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Forty-six patients were included in this study. The changes in SMT were evaluated using cone-beam computed tomography images produced at four time points: before extraction (T0), before surgery (T1), immediately after surgery (T2), and after prosthesis delivery (T3), and statistical differences between time points were analyzed. The changes in SMT and augmented bone height (ABH) regarding the reason of extraction, smoking, ostial patency, and the presence of postoperative sinusitis were also evaluated.

RESULTS

Over time points, SMT gradually decreased (T0: 19.44 ± 9.22 mm, T1: 15.10 ± 8.89 mm, T2: 8.42 ± 6.01 mm, and T3: 4.16 ± 4.91 mm) (p < .05). Five out of 6 patients with ostial obstruction at T1 presented ostial patency at T3. Two patients developed postoperative sinusitis but recovered with medication. Ostial patency at T1, SMT at T1, and reason of extraction did not statistically significantly influence SMT at T3. SMT at T1 had no statistically significant impact on ABH change between T2 and T3.

CONCLUSION

Sinus mucosal thickness was gradually reduced by extraction of compromised teeth and drainage during lateral sinus augmentation. The drainage contributed more to the reduction in SMT.

Healing of Unilateral Maxillary Sinusitis by Endodontic and Periodontal Treatment of Maxillary Teeth

Inflammatory conditions of dental origin may spread to the bone tissue, causing its destruction, and to anatomical structures located in the vicinity of the tooth affected with inflammation. Maxillary premolars and molars may develop inflammatory lesions of the Schneiderian membrane and lead to tooth-borne lesions in the maxillary sinuses. Unilateral inflammation of the maxillary sinuses should be diagnosed and treated. The aim of this study was to determine whether and after what time from the applied endodontic or nonsurgical periodontal treatment the inflammation in the maxillary sinus was diminished (assessed by the decrease in the Schneiderian membrane hypertrophy). A retrospective study was performed to analyze the records of endodontically, periodontally, or endodontically-periodontally treated patients with unilateral inflammation of the maxillary sinuses along with diagnostic Cone Beam Computed Tomography. The method for determination of the inflammation was measurements registered in millimeters in Carestream software. The analysis included the situation before treatment and 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months after completion of the treatment. Regardless of the origin of the maxillary sinus lesion, healing of inflammation of the sinus has been reported after the implementation of causative treatment of the maxillary tooth. Dental treatment reduces the need to implement conservative or surgical ENT treatment.

Odontogenic Sinusitis is a Common Cause of Operative Extra-Sinus Infectious Complications

BACKGROUND

Orbital, intracranial, and osseous extra-sinus complications can arise from bacterial or fungal sinusitis. Odontogenic sinusitis (ODS) can cause extra-sinus complications, but its prevalence remains poorly characterized.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the frequency of ODS as a cause of operative extra-sinus infectious complications and describe clinical features of all complicated sinusitis cases.

METHODS

A multi-institutional retrospective review was performed on all operative sinusitis-related extra-sinus complications from 2011 to 2020. ODS was diagnosed by sinus computed tomography (CT) and dental evaluations when available. Demographics, complication types, sinusitis etiologies, and various clinical features were analyzed.

RESULTS

Forty-five patients were included (mean age 55.5 years, 56% male). Of the extra-sinus complications, 40% were orbital only, 22% intracranial only, 13% osseous only, and 25% involved combined complications. The 2 most common causes of extra-sinus complications were ODS (40%) and mucopyocele (27%). When invasive fungal etiologies were excluded, and only unilateral maxillary opacification on CT was considered, nearly 60% of extra-sinus complications were due to ODS. Unilateral maxillary sinus opacification on CT was present in 100% of complicated ODS compared to 44% of nonodontogenic cases, and oral anaerobes were only identified in ODS cases. No complicated ODS patients underwent dental interventions during hospitalization.

CONCLUSION

ODS was the most common cause of operative extra-sinus infectious complications. Clinicians should consider ODS high on the differential diagnosis of all patients presenting with complicated sinusitis, especially when sinusitis is unilateral and invasive fungal infection is not suspected.

Odontogenic Sinusitis: From Diagnosis to Treatment Possibilities-A Narrative Review of Recent Data

The maxillary sinus is a structure at the border of specialties: otorhinolaryngology and maxillofacial surgery. Due to this fact, regarding etiology, it can be affected by both the rhinogenic and odontogenic path and can impose diagnostic difficulties. The etiopathogenic mechanisms that can affect the Schneiderian membrane are mainly inflammatory, iatrogenic, traumatic, and tumorous in nature. From a microbiological point of view, the bacteriology is polymorphic, including both aerobic and anaerobic species in acute OS, the predominating species in acute OS being aerobic, and in chronic anaerobic germs. The role of fungi in the determination of this pathology and in the production of the biofilm that leads to resistance to antibiotic treatment is also discussed. The present paper aims to present the etiopathogenesis, bacteriology, clinical manifestations, as well as treatment of odontogenic sinusitis (OS) from an updated perspective through reviewing the literature. If unilateral maxillary sinusitis is usually due to odontogenic causes, this does not clinically exclude the possibility of strictly rhinogenic causes in the occurrence of sinusitis. This underlines the important role of complex oral and rhinological clinical examination as well as the role of preclinical examinations in specifying the certainty diagnosis. Simple radiography, orthopantomography, CT, and CBCT are compared in terms of diagnostic accuracy. The treatment of OS is complex, involving medication, dental, and surgical measures. The value of endoscopic surgery is emphasized, comparing its advantages over the classic Caldwell-Luc technique.

Odontogenic sinusitis: A state‐of‐the‐art review

Odontogenic sinusitis (ODS) is more common than historically reported, and is underrepresented in the sinusitis literature. ODS is distinct from rhinosinusitis in that it is infectious sinusitis from an infectious dental source or a complication from dental procedures, and most commonly presents unilaterally. ODS clinical features, microbiology, and diagnostic and treatment paradigms are also distinct from rhinosinusitis. ODS evaluation and management should generally be conducted by both otolaryngologists and dental providers, and clinicians must be able to suspect and confirm the condition. ODS suspicion is driven by certain clinical features like unilateral maxillary sinus opacification on computed tomography, overt maxillary dental pathology on computed tomography, unilateral middle meatal purulence on nasal endoscopy, foul smell, and odontogenic bacteria in sinus cultures. Otolaryngologists should confirm the sinusitis through nasal endoscopy by assessing for middle meatal purulence, edema, or polyps. Dental providers should confirm dental pathology through appropriate examinations and imaging. Once ODS is confirmed, a multidisciplinary shared decision‐making process should ensue to discuss risks and benefits of the timing and different types of dental and sinus surgical interventions. Oral antibiotics are generally ineffective at resolving ODS, especially when there is treatable dental pathology. When both the dental pathology and sinusitis are addressed, resolution can be expected in 90%–100% of cases. For treatable dental pathology, while primary dental treatment may resolve the sinusitis, a significant percentage of patients still require endoscopic sinus surgery. For patients with significant sinusitis symptom burdens, primary endoscopic sinus surgery is an option to resolve symptoms faster, followed by appropriate dental management. More well‐designed studies are necessary across all areas of ODS.

Odontogenic sinusitis (ODS) is one of the most common cause of unilateral maxillary sinus disease, but has been underrepresented in previous sinusitis literature.

Clinicians must be able to suspect ODS based on certain clinical features like unilateral middle meatal purulence on nasal endoscopy, subjective foul smell, and sinus computed tomography demonstrating maxillary sinus opacification with or without overt adjacent dental pathology.

Diagnosing ODS requires confirmation of infectious sinusitis by otolaryngologists ideally with nasal endoscopy, and confirmation of adjacent maxillary dental pathology by dental specialists.

Management centers on multidisciplinary collaboration and shared‐decision making between otolaryngologists, dental specialists, and patients.

Clinical and radiographic assessment and restoration of maxillary sinus function in relation to oro-antral fistula closure: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to determine current practice in assessment of maxillary sinus health during oro-antral fistula closure.

METHOD

A systematic review using specific MeSH headings between 1990 and September 2021 on Medline, Ovid, and PubMed was performed. The inclusion criterion was closure of oro-antral fistula in adult patients. Exclusion criteria were oro-antral fistula arising in children; or from trauma, malignancy, or developmental abnormality; or any osteonecrotic lesion of bone. Risk of bias for individual papers was not assessed. Oxford Centre for Evidence Based Medicine levels of evidence were recorded.

RESULTS

4309 papers were identified, and 119 were eligible for review. Nineteen were from otolaryngology (16%), 25 from combined ear, nose, and throat (ENT) and oral/oral and maxillofacial (OS/OMF) surgery (21%), and 75 from OS/OMF surgery (63%). Preoperative rhinoscopy and cross-sectional imaging were reported in 33 papers (28%), reflecting the role of ENT with or without OS/OMFS. Sixty-eight did not record any formal assessment of maxillary sinus health (57%), of which 60 were from OS/OMF surgery (50%). Use of computed tomography was reported in 58 papers (49%), and use of cone beam computed tomography was reported in 8 papers (7%) but did not correlate with assessment of sinus health.

DISCUSSION

Most surgery for oro-antral fistual closure was undertaken without objective assessment of maxillary sinus health, pre- or postoperatively. The involvement of ENT was associated with formal assessment of maxillary sinus health.

Analysis of the Radiological Changes of the Sinus Membrane Using Cone Beam Computed Tomography and Its Relationship with Dental Treatments. A Retrospective Study

Simple Summary

Changes in the sinus membrane, in the form of thickening or opacification, usually pose problems of differential diagnosis between rhinological and odontogenic causes, given the similarity in their clinical behaviour. The interrelation between tooth roots and the possibility of maxillary sinus involvement seems to be a key determinant. Moreover, the role played by iatrogenic factors, especially surgical interventions, such as dental extractions, or impacted teeth, as well as implant treatments, must be considered. The contribution of new imaging procedures, such as conventional computed tomography or cone beam computed tomography, has triggered an increase in the identification of dental aetiology as a cause of the unilateral opacification of the anterior paranasal sinuses with the predominant involvement of the maxillary sinus.

Abstract

The aim of this study was to identify the most relevant dental factors and iatrogenic causes in the development of pathological changes to the sinus membrane and to analyse their possible influence on the development of odontogenic sinusitis. A descriptive, observational study was designed, with 276 patients who had been evaluated via cone beam computed tomography, analysing possible sinus thickening factors, such as apical infections, endodontic treatments, periodontitis, radicular cysts and impacted teeth, as well as iatrogenic factors caused by implant treatments or the development of oroantral communications produced during tooth extraction manoeuvres. Among the dental factors, periodontitis (47.1%), apical pathology (23.5%) and endodontic treatments (23.1%) were the predominant causes of sinus membrane thickening that most frequently produced an occupancy between 2 and 10 mm. Regarding the implant treatments, the placement of implants through the floor of the maxillary sinus was the main cause (9.8%), followed by sinus elevation techniques (6.2%). Dental extraction was the first cause of oroantral communication (5.0%), being the procedure that caused the greatest thickening of the sinus membrane. This study highlights the importance of dental treatments and iatrogenic factors in sinus pathology, and the need for diagnostic interrelations between the different specialists who address this pathology.

Expected Costs of Primary Dental Treatments and Endoscopic Sinus Surgery for Odontogenic Sinusitis

OBJECTIVES

Treatment of odontogenic sinusitis (ODS) due to apical periodontitis (AP) is highly successful when both dental treatment and endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) are performed. Variation exists in the literature with regard to types and timing of dental treatments and ESS when managing ODS. This study modeled expected costs of different primary dental and sinus surgical treatment pathways for ODS due to AP.

STUDY DESIGN

Decision-tree economic model.

METHODS

Decision-tree models were created based on cost and treatment success probabilities. Using Medicare and consumer online databases, cost data were obtained for the following dental and sinus surgical treatments across the United States: root canal therapy (RCTx), revision RCTx, apicoectomy, extraction, dental implant, bone graft, and ESS (maxillary, ± anterior ethmoid, ± frontal). A literature review was performed to determine probabilities of dental and sinus disease resolution after different dental treatments. Expected costs were determined for primary dental extraction, RCTx, and ESS pathways, and sensitivity analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Expected costs for the three different primary treatment pathways when dental care was in-network and all diseased sinuses opened during ESS were as follows: dental extraction ($4,753.83), RCTx ($4,677.34), and ESS ($7,319.85).

CONCLUSIONS

ODS due to AP can be successfully treated with primary dental treatments, but ESS is still frequently required. Expected costs of primary dental extraction and RCTx were roughly equal. Primary ESS had a higher expected cost, but may still be preferred in patients with prominent sinonasal symptoms. Patients' insurance coverage may also impact decision-making.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

N/A Laryngoscope, 2021.

Extrasinus Complications From Odontogenic Sinusitis: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

Odontogenic sinusitis (ODS) can cause infectious orbital, intracranial, and osseous complications. Diagnosis and management of complicated ODS have not been discussed in recent sinusitis guidelines. The purpose of this systematic review was to describe epidemiological and clinical features, as well as management strategies of complicated ODS.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library.

REVIEW METHODS

A systematic review was performed to describe various features of complicated ODS. All complicated ODS studies were included in qualitative analysis, but studies were only included in quantitative analysis if they reported specific patient-level data.

RESULTS

Of 1126 studies identified, 75 studies with 110 complicated ODS cases were included in qualitative analysis, and 47 studies with 62 orbital and intracranial complications were included in quantitative analyses. About 70% of complicated ODS cases were orbital complications. Only 23% of complicated ODS studies were published in otolaryngology journals. Regarding ODS-related orbital and intracranial complications, about 80% occurred in adults, and 75% were male. Complicated ODS occurred most commonly from apical periodontitis of maxillary molars. There were no relationships between sinusitis extent and orbital or intracranial complications. High rates of anaerobic and α-hemolytic streptococcal bacteria were identified in complicated ODS. Management generally included systemic antibiotics covering aerobic and anaerobic bacteria, and surgical interventions were generally performed to address both the complications (orbital and/or intracranial) and possible infectious sources (dentition and sinuses).

CONCLUSION

ODS should be considered in all patients with infectious extrasinus complications. Multidisciplinary management between otolaryngologists, dental specialists, ophthalmologists, and neurosurgeons should be considered to optimize outcomes.