Imaging Science in Dentistry

Korean Academy of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology (대한영상치의학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Distribution of the intraosseous branch of the posterior superior alveolar artery relative to the posterior maxillary teeth

  • Carsen R. McDaniel (Department of Periodontics, Army Postgraduate Dental School, Postgraduate Dental College, Uniformed Services University) ;
  • Thomas M. Johnson (Department of Periodontics, Army Postgraduate Dental School, Postgraduate Dental College, Uniformed Services University) ;
  • Brian W. Stancoven (Department of Periodontics, Army Postgraduate Dental School, Postgraduate Dental College, Uniformed Services University) ;
  • Adam R. Lincicum (Department of Periodontics, Army Postgraduate Dental School, Postgraduate Dental College, Uniformed Services University)
  • Received : 2023.07.24
  • Accepted : 2024.02.08
  • Published : 2024.06.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: Preoperative identification of the intraosseous posterior superior alveolar artery (PSAA) is critical when planning sinus surgery. This study was conducted to determine the distance between the cementoenamel junction and the PSAA, as well as to identify factors influencing the detection of the PSAA on cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). Materials and Methods: In total, 254 CBCT scans of maxillary sinuses, acquired with 2 different scanners, were examined to identify the PSAA. The distance from the cementoenamel junction (CEJ) to the PSAA was recorded at each maxillary posterior tooth position. Binomial logistic regression and multiple linear regression were employed to evaluate the effects of scanner type, CBCT parameters, sex, and age on PSAA detection and CEJ-PSAA distance, respectively. P-values less than 0.05 were considered to indicate statistical significance. Results: The mean CEJ-PSAA distances at the second molar, first molar, second premolar, and first premolar positions were 17.0±4.0 mm, 21.8±4.1 mm, 19.5±4.7 mm, and 19.9±4.9 mm for scanner 1, respectively, and 17.3±3.5 mm, 16.9±4.3 mm, 18.5±4.1 mm, and 18.4±4.3 mm for scanner 2. No independent variable significantly influenced PSAA detection. However, tooth position (b=-0.67, P<0.05) and scanner type (b=-1.3, P<0.05) were significant predictors of CEJ-PSAA distance. Conclusion: CBCT-based estimates of CEJ-PSAA distance were comparable to those obtained in previous studies involving cadavers, CT, and CBCT. The type of CBCT scanner may slightly influence this measurement. No independent variable significantly impacted PSAA detection.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

The views expressed in this manuscript are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy of the Department of Defense, the Department of the Army, the US Army Medical Department, or the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences.

References

  1. Pjetursson BE, Tan WC, Zwahlen M, Lang NP. A systematic review of the success of sinus floor elevation and survival of implants inserted in combination with sinus floor elevation. J Clin Periodontol 2008; 35(8 Suppl): 216-40. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051X.2008.01272.x
  2. 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2008.01.027
  3. Danesh-Sani SA, Loomer PM, Wallace SS. A comprehensive clinical review of maxillary sinus floor elevation: anatomy, techniques, biomaterials and complications. British J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2016; 54: 724-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjoms.2016.05.008
  4. Solar P, Geyerhofer U, Traxler H, Windisch A, Ulm C, Watzek G. Blood supply to the maxillary sinus relevant to sinus floor elevation procedures. Clin Oral Implants Res 1999; 10: 34-44. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1999.100105.x
  5. Hur MS, Kim JK, Hu KS, Bae HE, Park HS, Kim HJ. Clinical implications of the topography and distribution of the posterior superior alveolar artery. J Craniofac Surg 2009; 20: 551-4. https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0b013e31819ba1c1
  6. Kqiku L, Biblekaj R, Weiglein AH, Kqiku X, Stadtler P. Arterial blood architecture of the maxillary sinus in dentate specimens. Croat Med J 2013; 54: 180-4. https://doi.org/10.3325/cmj.2013.54.180
  7. Rosano G, Taschieri S, Gaudy JF, Weinstein T, Del Fabbro M. Maxillary sinus vascular anatomy and its relation to sinus lift surgery. Clin Oral Implants Res 2011; 22: 711-5. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.02045.x
  8. Mardinger O, Abba M, Hirshberg A, Schwartz-Arad D. Prevalence, diameter and course of the maxillary intraosseous vascular canal with relation to sinus augmentation procedure: a radiographic study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2007; 36: 735-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2007.05.005
  9. Elian N, Wallace S, Cho SC, Jalbout ZN, Froum S. Distribution of the maxillary artery as it relates to sinus floor augmentation. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2005; 20: 784-7.
  10. Rysz M, Ciszek B, Rogowska M, Krajewski R. Arteries of the anterior wall of the maxilla in sinus lift surgery. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2014; 43: 1127-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2014.02.018
  11. Kang SJ, Shin SI, Herr Y, Kwon YH, Kim GT, Chung JH. Anatomical structures in the maxillary sinus related to lateral sinus elevation: a cone beam computed tomographic analysis. Clin Oral Implants Res 2013; 24 Suppl A100: 75-81. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02378.x
  12. Apostolakis D, Bissoon AK. Radiographic evaluation of the superior alveolar canal: measurements of its diameter and of its position in relation to the maxillary sinus floor: a cone beam computerized tomography study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2014; 25: 553-9. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12119
  13. Kosalagood P, Silkosessak OC, Pittayapat P, Pisarnturakit P, Pauwels R, Jacobs R. Linear measurement accuracy of eight cone-beam computed tomography scanners. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2015; 17: 1217-27. https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.12221
  14. Hassan BA, Payam J, Juyanda B, van der Stelt P, Wesselink PR. Influence of scan setting selections on root canal visibility with cone beam CT. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2012; 41: 645-8. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr/27670911
  15. Hassan B, Metska ME, Ozok AR, van der Stelt P, Wesselink PR. Comparison of five cone beam computed tomography systems for the detection of vertical root fractures. J Endod 2010; 36: 126-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2009.09.013
  16. Gargiulo AW, Wentz FM, Orbon B. Dimensions and relations of the dentogingival junction in humans. J Periodontol 1961; 32: 261-7. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.1961.32.3.261
  17. Vacek JS, Gher ME, Assad DA, Richardson AC, Giambarresi LI. The dimensions of the human dentogingival junction. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 1994; 14: 154-65.
  18. Hausmann E, Allen K, Clerehugh V. What alveolar crest level on a bite-wing radiograph represents bone loss? J Periodontol 1991; 62: 570-2. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.1991.62.9.570
  19. Hammerle CH, Tarnow D. The etiology of hard- and soft-tissue deficiencies at dental implants: a narrative review. J Periodontol 2018; 89 Suppl 1: S291-303. https://doi.org/10.1002/JPER.16-0810