Clinical features and treatment outcomes of dental implant‐related paranasal sinusitis: A 2‐year prospective observational study. Issue 11 (12th February 2015)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Kim, So Jeong; Park, Jee Soo; Kim, Hee Tae; Lee, Cha Hee; Park, Yun Hwi; Bae, Jung Ho
• Is Part Of: Clinical oral implants research. Volume 27:Issue 11(2016)
• Page Start: e100
• Page End: e104
• Publication Date: 2015-02-12
• Subjects: dental implant -- endoscopic sinus surgery -- odontogenic sinusitis -- ostiomeatal unit; Dental implants -- Research -- Periodicals; 617.69
• DOI: 10.1111/clr.12570
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0905-7161

Abstract

Abstract: Objectives: As dental implant‐related paranasal sinusitis has different pathophysiology and clinical features from primarily rhinogenic paranasal sinusitis, the standard treatment protocol for dental implant‐related paranasal sinusitis has not yet been established. The aim of this study was to analyze the clinical characteristics and treatment results of dental implant‐related paranasal sinusitis. Material and methods: We conducted a prospective single‐center study of 19 patients who were treated for odontogenic sinusitis developing in relation to dental implant from September 2008 through May 2012. The age of the patients ranged from 33 to 78 years, with the mean age of 54.5 years. Foul odor and postnasal dripping were the two most common complaints. All patients underwent nasal endoscopic examination and paranasal sinus CT before treatment, and initial conservative treatment for 1 week. Patients unresponsive to medical treatment underwent endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS). All patients were classified into the conservative and surgical groups for analysis and followed up for 2 years after initial diagnosis. Results: Four patients (21%) were successfully treated conservatively, while 15 patients (79%) underwent surgical treatment. One of these 15 patients required revision surgery. After 2 years, all patients were successfully treated, so there were no more clinical signs of recurrent sinusitis in any patients. The survival rate of implants was 100%. Compared to those of the conservative group, symptom duration, the Lund–MacKay CT score, status of the ostiomeatal unit (OMU), and the condition of the maxillary sinus floor were significantly more severe in the surgical group. Conclusion: In our study, the majority of patients who once developed paranasal sinusitis associated with dental implants required surgical treatment. Findings of paranasal sinus CT may be important in determining treatment option.