Functional endoscopic sinus surgery as an adjunctive treatment for closure of oroantral fistulae: a retrospective analysis

Pathogenic factors of maxillary sinus mucosal thickening observed by cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT)

OBJECTIVE

To explore the pathogenic factors associated with maxillary sinus mucosal thickening with Cone-beam computed Tomography (CBCT).

METHODS

From 2016 through 2020, 93 patients with periapical periodontitis or periodontitis in the maxillary posterior dental region were selected.

RESULTS

The preoperative thickness of the periodontitis group was significantly higher than that of the periapical periodontitis group (P < 0.05). The difference achieves statistical significance for the comparison of the thickness change with various severity of inflammation (F = 54.824, P = 0.000), the change with time (F = 312.741, P = 0.000). and the change with the interaction severity of inflammation and time（F = 86.132, P = 0.000).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with maxillary sinus mucosa thickening caused by periodontitis and periapical periodontitis should be extracted their infectious teeth and get thoroughly debridement. Maxillary sinus augmentation can perform favorable efforts 3-6 months after extracting teeth.

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.

One-stage combined ENT and dental surgical treatment of odontogenic sinusitis: a prospective study

PURPOSE

The study analyses outcomes of the surgical treatment of odontogenic sinusitis that concurrently address sinusitis and its dental source.

METHODS

A total of 364 adult patients were included, representing 13% of all patients we have operated on for any rhinosinusitis over the past 18 years. The diagnosis was based on both ENT and dental examinations including CT imaging. Patients were divided into three groups: (1) FESS with dental surgery without antrotomy, (2) FESS with intraoral antrotomy, and (3) intraoral surgery without FESS. The mean postoperative follow-up was 15 months.

RESULTS

First group involved 64%, second group 31%, and third group 6% of the cases. The one-stage combined ENT and dental approach was used in 94% of cases (group 1 and 2) with a success rate of 97%. Concerning FESS, maxillary sinus surgery with middle meatal antrostomy only was performed in 54% of patients. Oroantral communication flap closure was performed in 56% of patients (success rate 98%). Healing was achieved within 3 months. The majority (87%) of patients were operated on unilaterally for unilateral findings. Over the past 18 years, a 6% increase of implant-related odontogenic sinusitis was observed.

CONCLUSION

Odontogenic sinusitis is common, tending to be unilateral and chronic. Its dental source needs to be uncovered and treated and should not be underestimated. Close cooperation between ENT and dental specialists has a crucial role in achieving optimal outcomes. The one-stage combined surgical approach proves to be a reliable, safe, fast and effective treatment.

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.

Factors Influencing Recurrence after Surgical Treatment of Odontogenic Maxillary Sinusitis: An Analysis from the Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Point of View

The aim of the study was to determine the factors influencing the development of recurrence after the surgical treatment of odontogenic maxillary sinusitis in an oral and maxillofacial surgery clinic over a 7-year period. Demographic and anamnesis data, clinical and radiological findings, treatment and outcome were analyzed. A multivariable analysis was performed to find associations between patient age, causative focus, surgical access for sinus revision, multilayer closure with a buccal fat pad, inferior meatal antrostomy (IMA) for temporary sinus drainage and sinusitis recurrence. A total of 164 patients with a mean age of 51.7 years were included. Sinusitis recurrence was observed in nine patients (5.48%) within 6 months after primary surgery. No significant correlation was detected between patient age, causative focus, surgical access for sinus revision, multilayer closure with a buccal fat pad, IMA for sinus drainage and the development of recurrence (p > 0.05). Patients with a history of antiresorptive-related osteonecrosis of the jaw showed a significant tendency toward disease recurrence (p = 0.0375). In conclusion, except for antiresorptive administration, none of the investigated variables were related to a higher risk of sinusitis recurrence. We encourage a combined approach of intraoral removal of the infective focus and sinus drainage via FESS, as well as an individual treatment decision in a multidisciplinary setting with collaboration between dentistry, maxillofacial surgery and otorhinolaryngology to avoid sinusitis recurrence.

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.

Odontogenic Maxillary Sinusitis: The Interface and Collaboration between Rhinologists and Dentists

Odontogenic maxillary sinusitis (OMS) is an inflammatory condition affecting the paranasal sinuses and is commonly encountered by both Otorhinolaryngologists and Dentists. However, there is an ongoing debate regarding the best sequence of management. Clinicians are faced with the dilemma of first addressing either the affected tooth or the affected sinus. This paper provides a review of the current literature on the aetiology, presentation, and management of OMS, as well as our experience in managing this condition. Overall, the causative pathology of the patient’s OMS, their symptoms, and the risk of surgery should drive decision making with regards to sequence of management.

Odontogenic sinusitis - case series and review of literature

BACKGROUND

Odontogenic sinusitis is a common cause of rhinosinusitis that is often undiagnosed and overlooked. No single sign or symptom is specific for odontogenic sinusitis, and failure to focus on the specific radiological features can delay diagnosis.

OBJECTIVE

This paper presents four cases of chronic sinusitis that had an odontogenic origin. Each case was referred for a second opinion. Three patients had previously undergone unsuccessful surgical management.

METHODS

The literature, and the associated contributory clinical, radiological and microbiological features required for correct diagnosis and management, are reviewed.

RESULTS

Each case resulted in a positive patient outcome following the involvement of both otolaryngology and maxillofacial surgery departments.

CONCLUSION

A high index of suspicion is advocated for odontogenic sinusitis in cases not responding to standard management plans. Collaboration with a maxillofacial specialist is important for diagnosis and management. This should be considered where standard management fails, or clinical features and radiological signs of odontogenic sinusitis are present. This paper also highlights the need for otolaryngologists to incorporate, at the very least, a basic dental history and examination as part of their assessment in recalcitrant cases.

ENT and dentist cooperation in the management of odontogenic sinusitis. A review

Odontogenic sinusitis represents by definition a border condition between otolaryngology and dental science and, from a holistic perspective, cannot be managed without a proficuous collaboration between specialists. This review focus on the different scenarios currently considered by international literature as related to odontogenic sinusitis and sinonasal complications of dental disease or treatment. Consequently, this review will cover all paranasal sinuses infections caused not only by dental disease (e.g. periodontitis and caries), but also by dental procedures (extractions, endodontics and the like), implantological procedures, pre-implantological (maxillary sinus grafting) and medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw. After dealing with the odontogenic sinusitis diagnostic process and general principles of treatment, we will thoroughly cover odontogenic sinusitis scenarios treatment following an aetiology-based approach. This literature review shows that, albeit more prospective and rigorous studies are badly needed for determining the best treatment for each patient affected by odontogenic sinusitis, the sheer variety of scenarios that may be encountered should be enough to encourage mutual collaboration between ENTs and dentist. Such collaboration is required both to perfect diagnostic and treatment and to provide a solid scientific and medico-legal foundation for each intervention proposed to patients.

Role of Endoscopic Sinus Surgery and Dental Treatment in the Management of Odontogenic Sinusitis Due to Endodontic Disease and Oroantral Fistula

Background: Odontogenic sinusitis (ODS) is frequently encountered in ENT practice; however, there are no guidelines regarding its management. This study aims to analyse the results of endoscopic sinus surgery versus dental treatment in ODS. Additionally, we aim to demonstrate the benefit of associating endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) to surgical closure of chronic oroantral fistulas (OAF) by comparing mean time to healing in patients who opted or not for concurrent ESS. Methods: Records of patients with ODS were reviewed. Group one consisted of patients with ODS caused by periapical pathology undergoing either endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) or dental treatment. Resolution of ODS was considered treatment success and was compared between the two treatment strategies. Group two included patients with ODS and associated chronic oroantral communication. Time to healing was compared between patients undergoing OAF closure alone versus patients receiving associated ESS, using the Log-Rank test to correlate Kaplan–Meier curves. Results: 25 patients from a total of 45 in group one underwent dental treatment alone, and 20 opted for exclusive ESS treatment. The failure rate was 40% for patients treated with ESS compared to 4% (one patient) for dental treatment. ODS resolved in all patients in the second group, but the mean time to healing was half (10 days) when ESS was complementary to OAF closure. Conclusion: The present study represents the first estimator of the role ESS plays in OAF treatment. Nonetheless, it provides proof of the importance of first addressing dental problems in odontogenic sinusitis.

Diagnostic Criteria for Odontogenic Sinusitis: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Odontogenic sinusitis affects a significant proportion of patients with paranasal sinus infections. Nevertheless, no shared diagnostic criteria for this condition have yet been implemented and published studies differ in their definition of the disease.

OBJECTIVE

The present systematic review of the literature was undertaken to characterize and analyze the different diagnostic criteria currently employed for odontogenic sinusitis.

METHODS

Systematic searches for studies published between 2009 and 2019 were performed in Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases. Search criteria were designed to identify all studies focusing, even partially, on odontogenic sinusitis. Human original studies except single case reports published in the English, French, German, Spanish, or Italian language were included. We removed duplicate abstracts and conducted full-text reads, data extraction, and quality assessment procedures (using the Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine levels of evidence and National Heart Lung and Blood Institute Study Quality Assessment Tools). We reviewed articles for diagnostic criteria, both in terms of definition and etiology identification.

RESULTS

Among 1,000 unique citations, 63 studies were deemed eligible. Most articles (n = 45) were retrospective case series; a single randomized clinical trial was available. Only 49 studies reported diagnostic criteria, yet relied marginally on published guidelines (n = 10 articles) for identifying sinusitis, often choosing instead to develop their own clinical (n = 15 articles), endoscopic (n = 12 articles), and/or radiologic (n = 30 articles) criteria. For odontogenic focus identification, 14 papers required a multidisciplinary evaluation, 11 papers required a time relationship between dental procedures and sinusitis, 24 papers required oroscopy and/or dental evaluation, and 53 papers required computed tomography.

CONCLUSIONS

Current diagnostic criteria for odontogenic sinusitis are extremely heterogeneous. Establishing shared diagnostic criteria aimed at defining both sinusitis and related odontogenic foci would spur collaboration between investigators and support more comprehensive outcomes evaluations together with a better understanding of treatment options.

Odontogenic maxillary sinusitis: A comprehensive review

Odontogenic maxillary sinusitis (OMS) is a well-recognized condition in both the dental and otolaryngology communities. Close to 30% of cases of unilateral maxillary sinusitis may have an underlying dental pathology. Failure to identify a dental cause usually lead to cases recalcitrant sinusitis often associated with serious complications. The aim of this study is to describe the literature findings on odontogenic maxillary sinusitis that discuss anatomy, epidemiology, etiology, bacteriology, diagnosis and treatment.

The present review is based on a current search using bibliographic database and academic search engine. All the articles on odontogenic maxillary sinusitis published after 2000 were included. This study seeks to provide clinicians with evidence that motivates a comprehensive approach to the evaluation and management of OMS. Controversies on diagnosis and management have been addressed and data from different treatment plans were collected by exploring relevant publications.

The surgical treatment of OMS is based essentially on the dental surgery, combined with endoscopic sinus surgery, in order to completely remove the infection, restore the physiological drainage of the sinus and prevent recurrences of sinusitis. A multidisciplinary otolaryngology and dental team is mandatory to successfully manage the dental pathology and the complications resulting from the dental treatments.

Management of odontogenic sinusitis: multidisciplinary consensus statement

BACKGROUND

Odontogenic sinusitis (ODS) can present a therapeutic dilemma because multiple treatment strategies have been reported. ODS review articles have been published, but they have lacked multidisciplinary collaboration and an evidence-based methodology. The purpose of this article was to perform an evidence-based review of ODS management options, and develop a multidisciplinary consensus statement on ODS management options.

METHODS

An evidence-based review of dental and medical literature on ODS management was performed using PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Review Databases up to December 2019. Exclusion criteria included non-English-language articles, case series with fewer than 10 patients, fungal sinusitis, and studies that did not report treatment success rates. Because aggregate levels of evidence for recommendations were no higher than level C, a clinical consensus statement was conducted using a modified Delphi method.

RESULTS

Sixteen articles met inclusion criteria for the evidence-based review on the following ODS management options: dental treatment alone or combined with ESS for various dental pathologies, and endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) alone for dental implant-related ODS. Strong consensus was achieved for 9 of the 10 clinical statements, the strongest being the use of shared decision-making for selecting management strategies. No consensus was reached for determining the extent of ESS necessary for uncomplicated ODS.

CONCLUSION

Strong consensus was reached that ODS management should involve shared decision-making between the otolaryngologist, dental provider, and patient, where the benefits and risks of dental treatment and ESS are discussed. Higher-quality studies are necessary to develop evidence-based treatment recommendations for ODS.

Odontogenic chronic rhinosinusitis patients undergoing tooth extraction: oral surgeon and otolaryngologist viewpoints and appropriate management

Objective

This study aimed to propose appropriate management for odontogenic chronic rhinosinusitis.

Method

Thirty-one adult patients with odontogenic chronic rhinosinusitis undergoing maxillary extraction were retrospectively analysed. Patients with (n = 21) and without (n = 10) oroantral fistula on computed tomography were classified. Functional endoscopic sinus surgery was performed when sinusitis did not improve after extraction. The critical indicators for surgical requirement in the management of odontogenic chronic rhinosinusitis were analysed.

Results

Sinusitis significantly improved after extraction in both groups. Patients without oroantral fistula had significantly more severe remnant sinusitis than those with oroantral fistula after extraction on computed tomography (p = 0.0037). The requirement for functional endoscopic sinus surgery was statistically significant for patients without orofacial fistula over those with orofacial fistula (p < 0.0001). The surgical improvement ratio was 93 per cent.

Conclusion

The absence of oroantral fistula and severe sinusitis can be critical indicators for the requirement of functional endoscopic sinus surgery after extraction in the management of odontogenic chronic rhinosinusitis.

Questioning the Justification of Frontal Sinusotomy for Odontogenic Sinusitis

PURPOSE

Odontogenic sinusitis (OS) can be caused by infectious conditions of the posterior maxillary teeth. The maxillary sinus has been most often involved because of its proximity to the posterior maxillary teeth. Often the anterior ethmoids and frontal sinuses will be involved by the infective process. The underlying odontogenic condition must be addressed before or during sinus surgery. The role of frontal sinusotomy in the treatment of these patients has been poorly described. Our objective was to present the surgical outcomes of patients with OS involving the frontal sinus who had undergone middle meatal antrostomy alone.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A prospective analysis of all patients who had undergone surgery at a single tertiary center to treat OS involving the frontal sinus from November 2015 to December 2018 was performed. Their preoperative assessment findings, surgical findings, and postoperative outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 45 patients (23 men and 22 women), with a median age of 57 years (range, 20 to 83 years), were enrolled in the present study. All anterior sinuses (frontal, anterior ethmoids, and maxillary sinuses) were clinically and radiographically involved in all the patients. Each patient underwent endoscopic wide maxillary middle meatal antrostomy concurrent with dental intervention. The average follow-up was 7 months. No signs of active frontal disease were detected by postoperative endoscopy in any patient, and no patient required revision surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

The results from the present study have shown that no justification exists for frontal sinusotomy for the treatment of OS involving the frontal sinus. Frontal sinusitis is a secondary infectious and inflammatory process that will resolve once the underlying odontogenic condition has healed and wide middle meatal antrostomy has been performed.

Combined endoscopic and intra-oral approach for chronic maxillary sinusitis of dental origin-a prospective clinical study

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

The traditional Caldwell-Luc approach for maxillary diseases has been criticized for its shortcomings such as removal of a large amount of bone, numbness of the teeth, flap dehiscence, and recurrent sinusitis. On account of its minimal invasiveness and physiological approach, functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS) has come to replace the Caldwell-Luc approach for the treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis. Chronic maxillary sinusitis of dental origin (CMSDO) is a less common variant on the chronic rhinosinusitis spectrum whose treatment involves simultaneous management of both the diseased maxillary sinus and the dental source of infection. Thus, this study was undertaken to assess the efficacy of FESS when combined with an intra-oral approach for the treatment of CMSDO.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Eighteen patients with CMSDO in the age group of 18-50 years were treated with a combined endoscopic and intra-oral approach (buccal advancement flap with/without buccal fat pad) in this study. The patients were followed up for a total duration of 18 months. The primary outcome measurements were the SNOT-22 Quality of Life questionnaire and the Lund and Mackay CT Scan Scoring Criteria. The Friedman test was used to assess improvement in the above variables and the level of significance was set at 0.05.

OBSERVATIONS AND RESULTS

There was a statistically significant reduction (p < 0.05) in both the above parameters at all post-operative intervals. Two patients presented with epistaxis (immediate post-operative phase) and synechiae (second week follow-up interval). Both complications were successfully resolved. Two patients showed recurrence at the 6th-month interval for which they underwent revision surgery successfully. Overall, results were maintained even at the 18th month follow-up interval.

CONCLUSION

The endoscopic approach appears to be a reliable, minimally invasive technique associated with less morbidity and stable long-term results. Thus, a multi-disciplinary approach between maxillofacial surgeons and otolaryngologists is essential in the treatment of CMSDO.

Single-step surgical treatment of odontogenic maxillary sinusitis: A retrospective study of 98 cases

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to review clinical and radiological presentation, surgery, and results of treatment in patients with chronic odontogenic maxillary sinusitis (OMS) treated with a single surgical procedure, including endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) and oral surgical approaches to treat the odontogenic source of infection.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective case series analysis of 98 patients was performed. All the patients received ESS. 88 patients required oral surgical approaches.

RESULTS

Nasal symptoms were present in 58 patients (59.2%). Nasal endoscopy was positive in 65 patients (66.3%). A positive nasal endoscopy was significantly associated with nasal symptoms (p < 0.05). 60 patients (61.2%) had OMS of iatrogenic origin. Total opacification of the maxillary sinus was the most common radiological presentation (74.5%) and was significantly associated with nasal symptoms (p < 0.05). 91 patients (92.9%) had complete clinical and radiological resolution of the OMS.

CONCLUSIONS

Iatrogenic origin, sinonasal symptoms and positive clinical endoscopy are common in patients with OMS. Nasal symptoms were significantly associated with total maxillary sinus opacification and positive endoscopic clinical examination. Combining treatment of the odontogenic source of infection via an oral surgical approach and of the sinus inflammation by ESS appears to be sufficient for successfully treating patients with OMS.

Odontogenic rhinosinusitis and sinonasal complications of dental disease or treatment: prospective validation of a classification and treatment protocol

Purpose

Odontogenic sinusitis and sinonasal complications of dental disease or treatment (SCDDT) represent a heterogeneous group of conditions that often require multidisciplinary care. The present study aims to prospectively validate a classification and treatment protocol for SCDDT patients.

Methods

One hundred twenty-eight consecutive patients (73 females and 45 males, mean age 52.4 years) affected by SCDDT not responding to dental and medical therapy were classified and surgically treated according to the proposed protocol. The protocol classified patients into three aetiology-based groups (preimplantologic, implantologic, and related to traditional dental diseases and procedures, respectively). The groups were further divided into classes according to the presence of oro-antral communications and/or dislocated dental hardware. Each condition was treated according to the class-related, protocol-defined treatment, by either a transnasal or combined transnasal/transoral approach. All patients were successfully classified according to our protocol. None of the proposed classes were redundant, and no condition fell outside the definitions.

Results

The surgical treatment protocol proved to be adequate and effective, in that 125 of the 128 patients completely recovered after surgical treatment.

Conclusions

The term SCDDT and the consequent classification proposed by the authors appear, therefore, to be nosologically correct. Furthermore, the protocol-related proposed treatment appears to be clinically sound, with a success rate nearing 98%.

Odontogenic sinusitis involving the frontal sinus: is middle meatal antrostomy enough?

OBJECTIVE/HYPOTHESIS

Inflammatory conditions of the posterior maxillary teeth may cause odontogenic sinusitis (OS), which most commonly involves the maxillary sinus due to its proximity to those teeth. The infective process frequently spreads outside the maxillary sinus, involving the anterior ethmoid and the frontal sinuses. The underlying odontogenic condition must be addressed before or during the surgical procedure. The role of frontal sinusotomy in this setting has not been studied. The aim of this study is to present the surgical outcome of patients who presented with OS involving the frontal sinus and were managed by middle meatal antrostomy alone.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

METHODS

All patients operated in our department due to OS involving the frontal sinus from November 2015 to December 2017 were recruited. Their demographics, complaints, imaging and endoscopic findings, surgical features and outcome were analyzed.

RESULTS

Twenty-five patients (male-to-female ratio 9:16) with a median age of 49 years (IQR = 43-53) were enrolled. The maxillary, frontal and anterior ethmoid sinuses were involved in each case, and each patient underwent maxillary middle meatal antrostomy alone. The median follow-up was 10 months, and no signs of active frontal disease were detected by postoperative endoscopy in any patient.

CONCLUSION

Frontal sinusotomy is apparently not necessary to resolve OS involving the frontal sinus. The frontal sinusitis may reflect a reactive process that regresses spontaneously once the underlying odontogenic condition is addressed and a middle meatal antrostomy had been performed.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

2B.

Monolateral sinonasal complications of dental disease or treatment: when does endoscopic endonasal surgery require an intraoral approach?

The widespread use of dental implants and reconstructive procedures for their positioning has led to an increase in sinonasal complications of dental disease and treatment (SCDDT). Diagnosis requires accurate dental and rhinological evaluation, including computed tomography (CT). The aim of this study is to investigate a multidisciplinary approach for the treatment of SCDDT by combining endoscopic endonasal surgery (EES) and an intraoral approach on the basis of a preliminary classification system already proposed by other authors. Moreover, we analysed the percentage of odontogenic maxillary sinusitis extending to the anterior ethmoidal sinuses and bacteria involved in the pathogenesis of SCDDT. Between January 2012 and August 2015, in our series of 31 patients, 16/31 patients (51.6%) were treated with EES, 3/31 patients (9.7%) with an intraoral approach and 12/31 patients (38.7%) with a combined approach. All patients reported improvement in sinusitis symptoms confirmed by clinical examinations and CT scan. No significant complications were recorded and revision surgery was not required. Finally, the results of this preliminary study suggest that a multidisciplinary approach to SCDDT from diagnosis to therapy allows more precise diagnosis and comprehensive therapy to achieve a rapid recovery and minimise the risk of recurrence.

Surgical Treatment of Oroantral Communications

BACKGROUND

Oroantral communication (OAC) can be defined as a pathologic space created between the maxillary sinus and the oral cavity.This communication and subsequent formation of a chronic oroantral fistula is a common complication often encountered by oral and maxillofacial surgeons.Although various techniques have been proposed in published studies, long-term successful closure of oroantral fistulas is still one of the most difficult problems confronting the surgeon working in the oral and maxillofacial region.The decision of which treatment modality to use is influenced by many factors, such as the amount and condition of tissue available for repair, the size and location of the defect, the presence of infection, the time to the diagnosis of the fistula.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate an alternative technique for the treatment of oro-antral fistula, using a combined therapeutic ear nose and throat/intraoral approach.

METHODS

Twelve consecutive patients affected by complicated OAC were included in this study.The protocol consisted of: clinical, endoscopic, and radiological preoperative evaluation (panoramic tomogram and computed tomography); systemic antibiotic and steroid therapy for 2 weeks before surgery; one-stage surgical procedure consisting of Functional Endoscopic Sinus Surgery technique associated with the closure of the OAC by a titanium mesh and a mucoperiosteal flap; postoperative antibiotic and cortisone-based therapy.A titanium mesh was used to obtain an optimal support and stabilization of soft tissues.Follow-up consisted of weekly clinical evaluation during the first month, a clinical evaluation at 1, 3, 6, 12, 24 months and a nasal endoscopy at 3, 8, 24 weeks after surgery. A second surgical step took place to remove the mesh, after a period of healing, which went from 6 to 18 months. Samples were harvested from the surgical site after mesh removal for histological analysis.

RESULTS

At 1 month follow-up, in 10 patients of 12, the Valsalva manoeuvre was negative, same result at the 3rd month follow-up, although in 11 of 12 patients. In 5 of 12 patients, the mesh was exposed. The histological analysis confirmed the formation of a pseudo-periosteum layer.One patient failed because the mesh lost its stability. The patient was operated again 8 months later and new mesh was fixed into place.

CONCLUSION

The current study showed that one-stage, combined endoscopic and intraoral approach represents a feasible and minimally invasive procedure for the long-term effective treatment of chronic complicated OACs.The main advantage of the use of a titanium mesh to guide the regeneration is that it assures a predictable healing, mechanic scaffold, tissues stability and allows a possible following oral rehabilitation.

Rhinosinusitis associated with post-dental extraction chronic oroantral fistula: outcomes of non-surgical management comprising antibiotics and local decongestion therapy

Objective:

A non-surgical approach for managing rhinosinusitis associated with chronic oroantral fistula resulting from tooth extraction was evaluated.

Methods:

Twenty-six consecutive patients (15 males and 11 females) aged 28–72 years (mean, 49.81 years) were administered local decongestion therapy for 2 weeks and antibiotics for 10 days. Patients showing a reduction in Sino-Nasal Outcome Test 22 scores after two weeks continued to receive local decongestion therapy weekly for up to six weeks, while those not showing any improvement underwent surgical management.

Results:

At 2 weeks, 17 patients (65.38 per cent) showed an improvement in rhinosinusitis (33.39 per cent mean reduction in Sino-Nasal Outcome Test 22 scores). The primary determinant of response was fistula size. At 6 weeks, sinusitis resolved completely in all 17 patients, and the fistula closed in 16 of these. Final Sino-Nasal Outcome Test 22 and Lund–Mackay scores showed no significant difference between the surgically treated and non-surgically treated groups.

Conclusion:

Local decongestion therapy along with antibiotics may promote resolution in this subset of rhinosinusitis patients.

Etiologies and Treatments of Odontogenic Maxillary Sinusitis: A Systematic Review

Context:

Maxillary sinusitis is an important issue in dentistry and maxillofacial surgery. This study aims to present a systematic review of etiologies and treatments of odontogenic maxillary sinusitis.

Evidence Acquisition:

An electronic database search was performed based on related MeSH keywords. Articles published between January 2001 and December 2014 was selected according to the inclusion criteria. The information extracted from various studies was categorized in various tables.

Results:

The study selected 19 studies. In most studies, oroantral fistula (OAF) was the most common etiology of odontogenic sinusitis. Alpha-hemolytic streptococcus was the most common flora in sinusitis with dental origin. The literature shows that the Caldwell-Luc approach may be the best method for treating sinusitis in cases of displaced teeth.

Conclusions:

OAF is a common cause of odontogenic maxillary sinusitis and may easily be treated by endoscopy and fistula closure. Maxillofacial surgeons and dentists should consider this problem to avoid misdiagnosis and prevent complications.

One stage combined endoscopic and per-oral buccal fat pad approach for large oro-antral-fistula closure with secondary chronic maxillary sinusitis

There are numerous surgical approaches for oro-antral-fistula (OAF) closure. Secondary sinus disease is still considered by many experts a relative contra indication for primary closure. To describe a single-stage combined endoscopic sinus surgery and per-oral buccal fat pad (BFP) flap approach for large OAF causing chronic maxillary sinusitis. The records of all the patients with OAF and chronic manifestations of secondary rhinosinusitis that were treated between 2010 and 2013 in our tertiary care medical center were reviewed. The exclusion criteria were: OAF ≤ 5 mm, resolved sino-nasal disease, OAF secondary to malignancy, recurrent fistula, medical history that included radiotherapy to the maxillary bone and age <18 years. Each procedure was performed by a team consisting of a rhinologist and a maxillofacial surgeon. The surgical approach included an endoscopic middle antrostomy with maxillary sinus drainage, and a per-oral BFP regional flap for OAF closure. Total OAF closure, complications and need for revision surgeries. Forty-five patients that underwent OAF closure together with sinus surgery using a combined endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) and BFP flap approach met the inclusion criteria. There were 28 males and 17 females with a mean ± SD age of 53.5 ± 14.9 years (range 22-80 years). The presenting signs and symptoms included purulent rhinorrhea (n = 22, 48.9 %), foreign body in sinus (n = 10, 22.2 %) nasal congestion (n = 7, 15.5 %), halitosis (n = 6, 13.3 %) and pain (n = 5, 12.2 %). Surgical complications included local pain (n = 2, 4.4 %), persistent rhinitis (n = 2, 4.4 %) and synechia (n = 1, 2.2 %). One patient required revision surgery due to an unresolved OAF. The OAF of all the other 44 patients (97.8 %) was closed after the first procedure and the paranasal sinuses on the treated side were completely recovered. The mean follow-up time for the group was 7.6 ± 4.3 months (7-21 months), and no untoward sequelae or recurrence were reported. Combined, one step, endoscopic Maxillary sinus drainage together with per-oral BFP flap approach is an efficacious surgical approach for safe closure of OAFs that are complicated with secondary chronic maxillary sinusitis.

Frequency of the odontogenic maxillary sinusitis extended to the anterior ethmoid sinus and response to surgical treatment

Objectives: Odontogenic sinusitis usually affects the maxillary sinus but may extend to the anterior ethmoid sinuses. The purpose of this study is to determine the percentage of odontogenic maxillary sinusitis extended to the anterior ethmoid sinuses and determine also the surgical resolution differences between odontogenic maxillary sinusitis and odontogenic maxillary associated to anterior ethmoidal sinusitis. Study Design: This is a retrospective cohort study performed on 55 patients diagnosed of odontogenic sinusitis and treated surgically by functional endoscopic sinus surgery. Results: This study showed that 52.7% of odontogenic maxillary sinusitis spreads to anterior ethmoid, causing added anterior ethmoid sinusitis. We found that 92.3% of the odontogenic maxillary sinusitis (who underwent middle meatal antrostomy) and 96.5% of the odontogenic maxillary sinusitis extended to the anterior ethmoid (treated with middle meatal antrostomy and anterior ethmoidectomy) were cured. Conclusions: Ethmoid involvement is frequent in maxillary odontogenic sinusitis. The ethmoid involvement does not worsen the results of “functional endoscopic sinus surgery” applied to the odontogenic sinusitis.

Key words:Odontogenic maxillary sinusitis, ethmoiditis, functional endoscopic sinus surgery.

Chronic maxillary rhinosinusitis of dental origin: a systematic review of 674 patient cases

Objectives. The aim of this systematic review is to study the causes of odontogenic chronic maxillary rhinosinusitis (CMRS), the average age of the patients, the distribution by sex, and the teeth involved. Materials and Methods. We performed an EMBASE-, Cochrane-, and PubMed-based review of all of the described cases of odontogenic CMRS from January 1980 to January 2013. Issues of clinical relevance, such as the primary aetiology and the teeth involved, were evaluated for each case. Results. From the 190 identified publications, 23 were selected for a total of 674 patients following inclusion criteria. According to these data, the main cause of odontogenic CMRS is iatrogenic, accounting for 65.7% of the cases. Apical periodontal pathologies (apical granulomas, odontogenic cysts, and apical periodontitis) follow them and account for 25.1% of the cases. The most commonly involved teeth are the first and second molars. Conclusion. Odontogenic CMRS is a common disease that must be suspected whenever a patient undergoing dental treatment presents unilateral maxillary chronic rhinosinusitis.

The treatment of sinusitis following maxillary sinus grafting with the association of functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS) and an intra-oral approach

AIM OF THE STUDY

To present the results of a prospective study on the management of infectious complications following maxillary sinus floor elevation procedures with a combined endoscopic (FESS) and intra-oral approach.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From 2005 to 2009, twenty consecutive patients were diagnosed for sinusal chronic infectious complications refractory to medical treatment following maxillary sinus floor elevation and grafting procedures. All patients were treated with a combination of functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS) through a transnasal approach and an intra-oral approach, performed by an ear, nose, and throat team and an oral and maxillofacial team, respectively, in the same surgical session under general anesthesia.

RESULTS

In 16 of 20 patients, the 4-week endoscopic control demonstrated a complete clinical healing and recovery of the normal sinus ventilation and drainage. In two patients, the persisting sinusitis at the 4-week control was successfully treated (8th week) with an antibiotic therapy based on the antibiogram carried out on the bacterial culture obtained by the aspiration of the sinusal content. In one patient, the persisting sinusitis (3 months after surgery) was successfully treated with the aspiration of the infectious material from the maxillary sinus. In one patient, finally, it was necessary to perform a second combined surgical treatment to treat the persisting sinusitis.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

In this study, a relevant number of cases of chronic infectious complications following sinus floor elevation procedures are presented. To the authors' knowledge, it is the first time that well-defined treatment protocols based on a combined endoscopic (FESS) and intra-oral surgical approach are proposed. The positive, albeit preliminary, results obtained in this study seem to validate this treatment modality.

Acquired arteriovenous fistula associated with traumatic oroantral fistula: endovascular treatment

BACKGROUND

Oroantral fistulas are pathologic connections between the oral cavity and the maxillary sinus. Arteriovenous fistulas are abnormal connections between an artery and a vein with no intervening capillary network.

METHODS

We present an extremely rare case of barotrauma-related oroantral fistula with an associated arteriovenous fistula between the internal maxillary artery and the ophthalmic venous system.

RESULTS

The patient developed an oroantral fistula from barometric pressure changes in the setting of sinusitis. After closure and revision of the oroantral fistula, he developed proptosis and chemosis. Angiography revealed an arteriovenous fistula between the internal maxillary artery and the ophthalmic venous drainage system in the area of the oroantral fistula, which was treated with endovascular embolization.

CONCLUSIONS

Arteriovenous fistulas may accompany oroantral fistulas created by trauma or surgery and should be considered in patients presenting with chemosis and proptosis. Treatment with embolization should be performed before surgical intervention.