|Year : 2018 | Volume
| Issue : 3 | Page : 254-256
Indications for palatal sinus lift: Case series
Amin Rahpeyma1, Saeedeh Khajehahmadi2
1 Oral and Maxillofacial Diseases Research Center, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences; Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Mashhad, Iran
2 Dental Research Center, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences; Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Pathology, School of Dentistry, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran
|Date of Submission||18-Dec-2017|
|Date of Acceptance||18-Mar-2018|
|Date of Web Publication||8-Jun-2018|
Dr. Saeedeh Khajehahmadi
Dental Research Center, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Vakilabad Blvd., Mashhad
Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None
| Abstract|| |
Background: Open sinus lift is indicated in posterior maxilla when subantral bone is insufficient for insertion of dental implants. Lateral approach is the most used technique. Sometimes, this surgery is difficult due to thick buccal bone or other anatomic variations of maxillary sinus. Aim: The aim of this study was to determine cases that palatal approach open sinus lift is indicated. Settings and Design: This study was a retrospective study. Materials and Methods: Archive files of Dental Implant Department of Mashhad Dental School were searched for palatal sinus lift. The reason for patients was noticed. Pre- and post-operative radiographs were evaluated. Results: Ten patients with palatal approach sinus lift were included. Seven patients had previous insufficient sinus lift, one patient had acute palatonasal recess, and two other patients had thick buccal bone. Conclusion: Palatal approach is maxillary open sinus lift is a useful auxiliary in patients with heavy buccal vestibule scar, thick buccal bone, deep palatonasal recess, and for reentry augmentation.
Keywords: Maxillary sinus, Schneiderian membrane, sinus lift
|How to cite this article:|
Rahpeyma A, Khajehahmadi S. Indications for palatal sinus lift: Case series. J Indian Soc Periodontol 2018;22:254-6
| Introduction|| |
Sinus lift is indicated for vertical augmentation of posterior maxilla for insertion of appropriate length dental implant.
Based on the amount of subantral bone, crestal or lateral approach is indicated.
In sever bone deficiency, open sinus lift through lateral maxillary sinus wall is the first option. Sometimes, this surgery is difficult due to lateral maxillary sinus wall thickness or large diameter alveolar antral artery.
Palatal approach for maxillary sinus membrane elevation is an option with unique indications.
| Materials and Methods|| |
In a retrospective study, archive files of Dental Implant Department of Mashhad Dental School were searched for palatal sinus lift. Surgical technique was done according to the standard protocol of department. Under local anesthesia, crestal incision with anterior palatal release in between first permanent maxillary premolar and canine was used to get access to palatal bone. With a round surgical bur, osteotomy window was prepared, and Schneiderian membrane was elevated from medial to lateral wall.
Allograft (Cenobone ® Tissue Regeneration Corporation, Iran) was used to fill the space between elevated Schneiderian membrane and sinus floor. Reflected palatal flap was sutured back to original position [Figure 1].
|Figure 1: (a) Vertical release in between first permanent maxillary premolar and canine, palatal osteotomy and elevation of Schneiderian membrane; (b) bone substitute is used to fill the biologic box; (c) triangular flap is sutured|
Click here to view
The reason for a palatal approach to maxillary sinus and demographic information of these patients were noticed. Pre- and post-operative radiographs were evaluated.
| Results|| |
Ten patients with palatal approach sinus lift were included in the study. Age ranges were between 20 (a trauma patient) and 68 years. Majority of the patients were female (60%). Seven patients had previous insufficient sinus lift, one patient had acute palatonasal recess, and two other patients had thick buccal bone [Figure 2] and [Figure 3]. Schneiderian membrane perforation had occurred during surgery in two patients, both with reentry augmentation. The results were analyzed by the amount of the added postoperative augmentation that was achieved.
|Figure 2: Palatal osteotomy. Vertical release is considered between maxillary canine and lateral to avoid soft tissue incision too close to osteotomy site|
Click here to view
|Figure 3: (a) Insufficient previous sinus lift; (b) postoperative cone-beam computed tomography, after recent augmentation with palatal approach; (c) schematic picture|
Click here to view
Angulation of palatonasal recess on the medial wall was considered as acute if it was <90°. A maxillary sinus wall was considered thick if it measured at least 2.3 mm in preoperative cone-beam computed tomography.
| Discussion|| |
Maxillary sinus lift is a preprosthetic surgery that was introduced by Tatum and Boyne in 1977–1980. Nowadays, this surgery can be done through three approaches; lateral, crestal, or palatal approach [Figure 4]. In open sinus lift, lateral approach is the most widely used technique. Palatal approach can be used in the cases with a deep palatonasal recess, thick buccal bone, or prominent alveolar antral artery that is located in buccal bony window osteotomy design. Vestibular scar with previous intrasinus manipulation through buccal approach makes reentry for secondary sinus lifting more difficult. Palatal approach to the maxillary sinus for elevating Schneiderian membrane has advantages in these situations.
|Figure 4: Three approaches for maxillary sinus lift: Lateral, crestal, and palatal; (a) lateral and palatal approaches for open sinus lift; (b) crestal approach for closed sinus lift in cases with more subantral bone|
Click here to view
Blood supply of maxillary sinus is provided through alveolar antral and greatest palatine arteries. The first is located within lateral maxillary sinus bony wall and the second is in the soft tissue of palate. With palatal approach, alveolar antral artery can still supply the augmented bone.
We suggest anterior vertical release in palate because of the added access and visibility. The best location for this release is between first permanent premolar and canine because of the small diameter of the greater palatine artery in this location. Anterior edge of palatal osteotomy window has influential effect on the location of this release. Flap margins should rest on healthy bone, and in the case of anticipated overlap, vertical release should be transferred more anteriorly between canine and lateral. Vertical release in palatal mucosa has not designed to prevent injury to greater palatine artery. Vertical release crosses palatine artery at the right angle. Intentional cutting of this artery in between canine and first premolar almost is not accompanied with pulsatile bleeding. However, if the surgeon confronts with bleeding from this artery, it easily can be controlled by electrocautery or suture ligation. Long envelope flap extending to midline to avoid intentional cutting of greater palatine artery is recommended by some authors. Small distal release is mentioned by others.,
Hematoma formation is possible in edentulous patients that whole palatal mucosa is reflected. Suturing back palatal flap to periosteal remnants in palate or bone suture is strongly recommended in this situation. In partial edentulous patients, deep bites of palatal flap by stiches can prevent hematoma formation. If hematoma happened in palate, accumulated blood should be aspirated.
This surgery is more easily done if the patient has a high palatal vault and thin palatal bone. Facial swelling in this technique is minimal, and risk of emphysema is reduced. This is important in airline travelers and pilots. Edentulous patients can wear dentures without difficulty because of preserved buccal vestibule. Connective tissue flap can easily be obtained for the management of Schneiderian membrane perforation if it is needed [Figure 5].
|Figure 5: Posteriorly based connective tissue flap is used to manage sinus membrane perforation during palatal sinus lift|
Click here to view
Palatal approach sinus lift is technically more difficult than lateral approach, so it is not recommended for first-time sinus lift if lateral approach is feasible. In our department, majority of cases were reentry augmentations. The difficulty of the procedure increases in thick palatal bone, low palatal vault, and maxillary second molar region. However, this method should be considered as plan B in every maxillary open sinus lift surgery.
| Conclusion|| |
Palatal approach is maxillary open sinus lift is a useful auxiliary in patients with heavy buccal vestibule scar, thick buccal bone, deep palatonasal recess, and for reentry augmentation.
Financial support and sponsorship
Conflicts of interest
There are no conflicts of interest.
| References|| |
Kim YK, Kim SG. A retrospective analysis of the retreatment of failed sinus bone grafts. Implant Dent 2016;25:450-4.
Ueno D, Kurokawa T, Maruo K, Watanabe T, Jayawardena JA. Palatal window osteotomy technique improves maxillary sinus augmentation in previously insufficient augmentation case. Int J Implant Dent 2015;1:19.
Rahpeyma A, Khajehahmadi S. Bone suture and lateral sinus lift surgery. J Indian Soc Periodontol 2015;19:593-4.
] [Full text]
Rahpeyma A, Khajehahmadi S, Amini P. Alveolar antral artery: Does its diameter correlate with maxillary lateral wall thickness in dentate patients? Iran J Otorhinolaryngol 2014;26:163-7.
Chan HL, Monje A, Suarez F, Benavides E, Wang HL. Palatonasal recess on medial wall of the maxillary sinus and clinical implications for sinus augmentation via lateral window approach. J Periodontol 2013;84:1087-93.
Zijderveld SA, van den Bergh JP, Schulten EA, ten Bruggenkate CM. Anatomical and surgical findings and complications in 100 consecutive maxillary sinus floor elevation procedures. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2008;66:1426-38.
Boyne PJ, James RA. Grafting of the maxillary sinus floor with autogenous marrow and bone. J Oral Surg 1980;38:613-6.
Rahpeyma A, Khajehahmadi S. Open sinus lift surgery and the importance of preoperative cone-beam computed tomography scan: A review. J Int Oral Health 2015;7:127-33.
Mardinger O, Moses O, Chaushu G, Manor Y, Tulchinsky Z, Nissan J, et al.
Challenges associated with reentry maxillary sinus augmentation. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2010;110:287-91.
Rahpeyma A, Khajehahmadi S. Alveolar antral artery: Review of surgical techniques involving this anatomic structure. Iran J Otorhinolaryngol 2014;26:73-8.
Florio S, Suzuki T, Cho SC. The palatal window for treating an incompletely augmented maxillary sinus. Implant Dent 2017;26:328-31.
Jensen OT, Perkins S, Van de Water FW. Nasal fossa and maxillary sinus grafting of implants from a palatal approach: Report of a case. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1992;50:415-8.
Sakakibara A, Suzuki H, Yamashita A, Hasegawa T, Minamikawa T, Furudoi S, et al.
Facial emphysema after sinus lift. J Surg Case Rep 2015;2015. pii: rjv067.
Stübinger S, Saldamli B, Seitz O, Sader R, Landes CA. Palatal versus vestibular piezoelectric window osteotomy for maxillary sinus elevation: A comparative clinical study of two surgical techniques. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2009;107:648-55.
[Figure 1], [Figure 2], [Figure 3], [Figure 4], [Figure 5]
|This article has been cited by|
||The Palatal Approach for Direct Maxillary Sinus Floor Elevation: A Case Report
| ||Ioannis Kormas, Alessandro Pedercini, David B. Paulson, Massimo Costalonga |
| ||Clinical Advances in Periodontics. 2021; |
|[Pubmed] | [DOI]|
||The feasibility of injectable PRF (I-PRF) for bone tissue engineering and its application in oral and maxillofacial reconstruction: From bench to chairside
| ||Nima Farshidfar, Mohammad Amin Amiri, Dana Jafarpour, Shahram Hamedani, Seyyed Vahid Niknezhad, Lobat Tayebi |
| ||Materials Science and Engineering: C. 2021; : 112557 |
|[Pubmed] | [DOI]|
||Clinical and radiographic outcomes of reentry lateral sinus floor elevation after a complete membrane perforation
| ||Da Wang, Jiehua Tian, Ying Wang, Donghao Wei, Ye Lin |
| ||Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research. 2020; 22(5): 574 |
|[Pubmed] | [DOI]|