Management of odontogenic sinusitis: multidisciplinary consensus statement

Dental findings frequently overlooked in sinus computed tomography reports

OBJECTIVES

Computed tomography (CT) and cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) represent the main imaging modalities used in rhinosinusitis patients and are also important in odontogenic sinusitis (OS) diagnostics. Reports, however, often lack information on dentition. Here, we aimed to determine how maxillary dentition is initially interpreted in rhinosinusitis patients' CT/CBCT reports and which dental findings in particular are potentially missed, thus needing more attention.

STUDY DESIGN

CT/CBCT scans and radiological reports from 300 rhinosinusitis patients were analysed focusing specifically on dental findings. An experienced oral and maxillofacial radiologist re-evaluated the scans and the assessment was compared to the original reports using the McNemar test.

RESULTS

From the 300 original reports, 233 (77.7%) mentioned the maxillary teeth. The most frequent statement (126/300, 42.0%) was 'no apical periodontitis'. Apical periodontitis and severe alveolar bone loss were significantly overlooked (p < 0.001). Amongst the 225 patients for whom the CT/CBCT report initially lacked information on dental pathology, 22 patients were diagnosed with apical periodontitis and 16 with severe alveolar bone loss upon re-evaluation.

CONCLUSIONS

Dental pathology remains underreported in rhinosinusitis patients' CT/CBCT reports. Because these reports affect OS diagnostics, a routine and structured review of the maxillary teeth by a radiologist is necessary. Such examinations should encompass the maxillary 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.

Reliability of large language models in managing odontogenic sinusitis clinical scenarios: a preliminary multidisciplinary evaluation

PURPOSE

This study aimed to evaluate the utility of large language model (LLM) artificial intelligence tools, Chat Generative Pre-Trained Transformer (ChatGPT) versions 3.5 and 4, in managing complex otolaryngological clinical scenarios, specifically for the multidisciplinary management of odontogenic sinusitis (ODS).

METHODS

A prospective, structured multidisciplinary specialist evaluation was conducted using five ad hoc designed ODS-related clinical scenarios. LLM responses to these scenarios were critically reviewed by a multidisciplinary panel of eight specialist evaluators (2 ODS experts, 2 rhinologists, 2 general otolaryngologists, and 2 maxillofacial surgeons). Based on the level of disagreement from panel members, a Total Disagreement Score (TDS) was calculated for each LLM response, and TDS comparisons were made between ChatGPT3.5 and ChatGPT4, as well as between different evaluators.

RESULTS

While disagreement to some degree was demonstrated in 73/80 evaluator reviews of LLMs' responses, TDSs were significantly lower for ChatGPT4 compared to ChatGPT3.5. Highest TDSs were found in the case of complicated ODS with orbital abscess, presumably due to increased case complexity with dental, rhinologic, and orbital factors affecting diagnostic and therapeutic options. There were no statistically significant differences in TDSs between evaluators' specialties, though ODS experts and maxillofacial surgeons tended to assign higher TDSs.

CONCLUSIONS

LLMs like ChatGPT, especially newer versions, showed potential for complimenting evidence-based clinical decision-making, but substantial disagreement was still demonstrated between LLMs and clinical specialists across most case examples, suggesting they are not yet optimal in aiding clinical management decisions. Future studies will be important to analyze LLMs' performance as they evolve over time.

Retrospective comparison of first-line treatments for odontogenic sinusitis based on duration of symptoms

Objectives

To investigate the clinical efficacy of dental treatment and endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS), each primary/combined treatment modality, in patients with odontogenic sinusitis (ODS), according to its phase, acute or chronic.

Materials and methods

We retrospectively reviewed clinical data on 172 patients diagnosed with ODS. They were divided into two groups: acute (≤ 3 months; 90 patients) and chronic (> 3 months; 82 patients) ODS. The success rate and time to resolution of each primary/combined treatment modality were compared between the two groups.

Results

In both ODS groups, the success rate was highest with combined ESS and dental therapy, followed by ESS alone and dental therapy alone. ESS outperformed dental therapy (96.6% vs 65.5% for acute ODS, p = 0.011; 80.6% vs 56.5% for chronic ODS, p = 0.046) and led to quicker resolution of symptoms for acute ODS than dental therapy (0.9 vs 1.7 months, p = 0.012). In the comparison between ESS alone and combined therapy, no significant difference was observed for acute ODS, whereas combined therapy demonstrated a superior success rate for chronic ODS (100% vs 80.6%, p = 0.046).

Conclusions

In our study, the clinical utility of dental treatment and/or ESS depended on the morbidity period of ODS. For chronic ODS, combined ESS and dental treatment seems to be an effective first-line treatment.

Trends of Odontogenic Sinusitis Incidence During the COVID-19 Pandemic

OBJECTIVES

The COVID-19 pandemic affected the epidemiology of several diseases. This study aims to compare the incidence of surgically treated odontogenic sinusitis (ODS) before and during the COVID-19 pandemic and identify unique features.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review of patients who underwent at least maxillary antrostomy at a tertiary referral center was performed. The patients were divided into two cohorts: "pre-COVID" (March 2018 to February 2020) and "COVID" (March 2020 to February 2022). Data on demographics, comorbidities, and treatment interventions were collected and analyzed.

RESULTS

Of the 734 patients who underwent maxillary antrostomy, 370 (50.4%) were operated on during the COVID period, with a mean age of 53.1 ± 15.7 years. ODS was found as the etiology of 22 (6%) and 45 (12.2%) of the pre-COVID and COVID cases, respectively (p = 0.006). Although no difference was found in the incidence of diabetes (p = 0.9) or obesity (p = 0.7) between groups, a trend toward higher incidence of immunosuppression was found in the pre-COVID patients (18.2% vs. 0%, p = 0.06). A higher incidence of sphenoid sinus involvement (31.8% vs. 8.9%, p < 0.05) was identified in the pre-COVID group; however, no differences in ethmoid (86.4% vs. 86.7%, p = 0.999) or frontal sinus involvement (54.5% vs. 37.8%, p = 0.3) were found between the groups.

CONCLUSION

There was an increase in the incidence of ODS during the first 2 years of the COVID-19 pandemic compared to the 2 years prior. Similar clinical characteristics were found in both groups. Future studies focusing on specific etiologies to explain ODS preponderance may help determine optimal treatment and prevention strategies.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3 Laryngoscope, 134:1597-1602, 2024.

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.

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.

["Radical" versus "functional" surgery of the paranasal sinuses-A contradiction?]

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The terms "functional" and "radical" paranasal sinus surgery were often considered to be different operations which were mutually exclusive. This overview aims to look at the basics of these terms and surgical procedures and to work out the resulting surgical concepts for clinically relevant indications.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Selective literature analysis using the data base PubMed, corresponding textbooks and resulting secondary literature regarding functional and radical or extended paranasal sinus surgery. Similarly, the current literature regarding clinically relevant indications for sinus surgery were analyzed.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

Modern pathophysiological knowledge, anatomically and pathophysiologically substantiated endoscopic surgical procedures and the usage of up to date technical possibilities have resulted in concepts which combine functional and so-called radical or extended surgery of the paranasal sinuses that complement each other and sometimes even overlap. The preoperative diagnosis and definition of underlying diseases are decisive and should be as precise as possible, as the extent and surgical details mainly depend on them: a sole creation of free drainage pathways, an additional creation of anatomical access for subsequent topical treatment or a complete (radical) removal of a pathological process.

Endo-Periodontal Lesions-An Overlooked Etiology of Odontogenic Sinusitis

The aim of this study was to analyze the oral etiology of patients with odontogenic sinusitis (ODS) and to compare the differences in demographic data, clinical symptoms, extent of sinus involvement, bone penetration of the maxillary sinus floor (MSF) between different etiologies. A retrospective investigation was conducted on 103 patients with ODS recruited from Beijing TongRen Hospital. All enrolled patients underwent sinus CT, nasal endoscopy, and oral examination. A comparison of the patients' clinical symptoms, the extent of involvement of the sinuses, and bone resorption of the MSF according to odontogenic etiologies was conducted. Follow-up was based on symptoms and clinical examination. The most common odontogenic etiologies were endo-periodontal lesions (EPLs, 49.5%), apical periodontitis (AP, 32.0%), and periodontitis (PE, 8.7%). There were statistically significant differences in age (p = 0.002), sex (p = 0.036), inflammation involving the ethmoid sinus (p = 0.037), and bone penetration of the MSF (p < 0.001) between the AP, EPL, and PE groups. There were no significant differences in sinusitis symptoms (p > 0.005) among patients with different odontogenic etiologies. In conclusion, EPL is a neglected oral etiology with a destructive effect on the bone of the MSF, which deserves more attention in diagnosis and treatment.

The Necessity of Subsequent Dental Treatment for Odontogenic Sinusitis After Endoscopic Sinus Surgery

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the necessity of subsequent dental treatment for patients with odontogenic sinusitis (OS) after endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS).

METHODS

OS patients who received ESS from January 2018 to May 2022 were eligible. Demographic data, medical history, Lund-Mackay (LM) computed tomography (CT) score, Lund-Kennedy (LK) endoscopic score, and OS-specific CT score were recorded and analyzed. All patients were followed up for 6 months after surgery.

RESULTS

A total of 48 patients (30 males and 18 females) were enrolled. A total of 35 cases (72.9%) were caused by dental diseases (periapical periodontitis), and 13 cases (27.1%) were caused by iatrogenic factors (including tooth extraction or implantation). The overall treatment success rate was 97.9%, and the success rates in the dental disease OS group (97.1%) and the iatrogenic OS group (100%) were not significantly different (X2 = 0.329, P = .729). None of the patients in the dental disease group received treatment of the causative teeth within 6 months after the operation, except for one patient who received tooth extraction treatment 6 months after the operation.

CONCLUSION

Without considering the impact of dental disease on patients' oral health, OS can be completely alleviated by ESS alone, even if no dental treatment is carried out after surgery.

Management of Odontogenic Sinusitis: Results with Single-Step FESS and Dentoalveolar Surgery

OBJECTIVE

Odontogenic sinusitis (OS) is a well-known and important border of specialties in otorhinolaryngology and dentoalveolar surgery. Odontogenic sinusitis can develop due to iatrogenic harm or odontogenic infection. The gold standard diagnostic method is clinical and radiological-CBCT (cone beam computed tomography)-examination. The treatment of this condition requires collaboration between ENT and dentoalveolar surgery specialists and can be non-surgical or surgical based on staging. This paper aims to share the results of our clinical study whereby complex therapy was administered by a dentoalveolar surgeon and an otorhinolaryngologist in cooperation.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study comprising 111 OS patients who underwent complex therapy between 2016 and 2023 at Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary. All patients were treated with concurrent FESS (functional endoscopic sinus surgery) and dentoalveolar surgery. Follow-up was based on symptoms, clinical examination and CBCT imaging.

RESULTS

Of the 111 patients, 107 were successfully treated with concurrent FESS and dentoalveolar surgery, and only 4 had further symptoms following the complex therapy and needed retreatment.

CONCLUSIONS

The complex, single-session therapy involving FESS and oral surgery is an effective treatment method, which is less invasive and associated with fewer complications compared to previous interventions, such as the Luc-Caldwell procedure.

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.

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.

Real-Life Experience in the Management of Sinonasal Complications of Dental Disease or Treatments

Diagnosis and management of sinonasal complications of dental diseases or treatment (SCDDT) may be challenging. We aimed to report our real-life experience in patients treated with endoscopic endonasal approach describing data about symptoms, etiology, extension of the disease and success rate. We evaluated retrospectively data about 262 patients diagnosed as SCDDT and managed from August 2015 to May 2022. In 44.65% cases, maxillary sinus complications were determined by a dental disorder; the remaining 55.34% of cases were iatrogenic. Patients were managed according to our multidisciplinary protocol including ENT, dental, and radiological evaluation. Treatments were planned with a personalized approach, based on the patient’s clinical characteristics; all patients were treated with an endonasal endoscopic mini-invasive conservative approach. Combined dental treatment was performed simultaneously in 152/262 (58%) of patients; in the remaining cases, it was postponed after surgery. The overall treatment success rate (symptom resolution and endoscopically observed maxillary sinus healing) was 96.5%. At 15 days after surgery, we observed a significant improvement in the quality of life. The mean post-operative Sinonasal outcome test-22 (SNOT-22) score was significantly lower compared to baseline (6 versus 43.4; p < 0.05). Our study showed that endoscopic sinus surgery can be a successful procedure for treatment of SCDDT, leading to fast resolution of sinonasal symptoms and improving the quality of life. Furthermore, the technique allows removal of migrated dental material or dental implants even in challenging cases.

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.

Prelacrimal Window Approach in the Management of Odontogenic Maxillary Sinusitis from Dental Foreign Body

The floor of the maxillary sinus is partly formed by the alveolar process of the maxilla, and this anatomical relationship forms an interface for collaboration between rhinologists, maxillofacial and dental surgeons, and dentists. Odontogenic maxillary sinusitis (ODMS) occurs secondary to infectious processes of the maxillary molar and premolar teeth or following complications from dental procedures. Extruded dental foreign bodies within the sinus can cause chronic mucosal irritation leading to mucociliary dysfunction and sinogenic symptoms. Anteriorly placed foreign bodies are difficult to access via the conventional endoscopic maxillary antrostomy. Endoscopic approaches to access the anterior maxillary sinus involve extended resection of the medial maxillary wall, potentially with the removal of the inferior turbinate and nasolacrimal duct mobilisation. The prelacrimal window approach (PLWA) is a favourable modification that provides excellent visualisation of the maxillary sinus with minimal tissue resection and displacement. We describe the case of an extruded distobuccal 27 tooth root into the anterior maxillary sinus, presenting with acute sinusitis. The patient was successfully managed via a PLWA. This case represents the importance of recognition of ODMS with early referral to otorhinolaryngologists.

Treatment of Sinusitis Following Dental Implantation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Implantological procedures aimed at rehabilitating upper jaw edentulous patients (dental implant placement and/or maxillary sinus grafting) can sporadically result in sinusitis. In these patients, endoscopic sinus surgery is the most commonly employed treatment, but clinical scenarios and comprehensive management strategies are extremely heterogeneous across studies.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to systematically define treatment strategies and related success rates for sinusitis following dental implantation, detailing different current treatment choices and concepts.

METHODS

Adopting a PRISMA-compliant review framework, systematic searches were performed in multiple databases using criteria designed to include all studies published until November 2020 focusing on the treatment of human sinusitis following dental implantation. We selected all original studies, excluding case reports, specifying treatment modalities with objective treatment success definitions. Following duplicate removal, abstract and full-text selection, and quality assessment, we reviewed eligible articles for treatment modalities and success rates, which were pooled in a random-effects meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Among 581 unique citations, eight studies (181 patients) were selected. Seven studies were retrospective case series. All studies relied on endoscopic sinus surgery, often coupled with intraoral accesses, and assessed therapeutic success endoscopically. The pooled treatment success rate was 94.7% (95% confidence interval, 91.5%-98%). Failures were treated in seven of 15 cases with further antibiotic therapies and in another seven cases with surgical revision. A single patient was lost to follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic sinus surgery appears to be the most frequent treatment of choice for sinusitis following dental implantation, with excellent success rates. The protean clinical picture drawn from the selected studies calls for the standardization of diagnostics and definitions in this field to enable direct comparisons between the results of different studies. The role of postoperative antibiotic therapies, which have been employed unevenly across studies, should also be prospectively investigated.

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.

Dental and Oral Manifestations of COVID-19 Related Mucormycosis: Diagnoses, Management Strategies and Outcomes

It has been nearly two years since the pandemic caused by the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has affected the world. Several innovations and discoveries related to COVID-19 are surfacing every day and new problems associated with the COVID-19 virus are also coming to light. A similar situation is with the emergence of deep invasive fungal infections associated with severe acute respiratory syndrome 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Recent literature reported the cases of pulmonary and rhino-cerebral fungal infections appearing in patients previously infected by COVID-19. Histopathological analysis of these cases has shown that most of such infections are diagnosed as mucormycosis or aspergillosis. Rhino-orbital-cerebral mucormycosis usually affects the maxillary sinus with involvement of maxillary teeth, orbits, and ethmoidal sinuses. Diabetes mellitus is an independent risk factor for both COVID-19 as well as mucormycosis. At this point, there is scanty data on the subject and most of the published literature comprises of either case reports or case series with no long-term data available. The aim of this review paper is to present the characteristics of COVID-19 related mucormycosis and associated clinical features, outcome, diagnostic and management strategies. A prompt diagnosis and aggressive treatment planning can surely benefit these 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.

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.

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.

Diagnosing odontogenic sinusitis of endodontic origin: A multidisciplinary literature review

PURPOSE

Endodontic disease is one of the most common causes of bacterial odontogenic sinusitis (ODS). Diagnosing ODS of endodontic origin involves otolaryngologists confirming sinusitis, and dental specialists confirming endodontic sources. The purpose of this study was to conduct a multidisciplinary literature review to highlight clinical and microbiological features of ODS, and the most optimal diagnostic modalities to confirm endodontic disease.

METHODS

An extensive review of both medical and dental literature was performed by rhinologists, endodontists, and an infectious disease specialist. Frequencies of various clinical and microbiological features from ODS studies were collected, and averages were calculated. Different endodontic testing and imaging modalities were also evaluated on their abilities to confirm endodontic disease.

RESULTS

ODS patients most often present with unilateral sinonasal symptoms for over 3 months, purulence on nasal endoscopy, and overt dental pathology on computed tomography (CT). Subjective foul smell, and maxillary sinus cultures demonstrating anaerobes and α-streptococci (viridans group) may be more specific to ODS. For endodontic evaluations, cold pulp testing and cone-beam CT imaging are most optimal for confirming pulpal and periapical disease.

CONCLUSION

Diagnosing ODS requires collaboration between otolaryngologists and dental specialists. Clinicians should suspect ODS when patients present with unilateral sinonasal symptoms, especially foul smell. Patients will generally have purulent drainage on nasal endoscopy, and both sinus opacification and overt dental pathology on CT. However, some patients will have subtle or absent dental pathology on CT. For suspected endodontic disease, endodontists should be consulted for at least cold pulp testing, and ideally cone-beam CT.

Spontaneous healing in maxillary fungus ball: Beware of asymptomatic patients

Incidentally diagnosed, asymptomatic, paranasal fungus ball might occasionally undergo spontaneous healing. Accurate preoperative workup may avoid unnecessary surgical or anesthesiological procedures.

Odontogenic sinusitis publication trends from 1990 to 2019: a systematic review

PURPOSE

Odontogenic sinusitis (ODS) is underrepresented in the literature compared to other forms of rhinosinusitis, specifically in sinusitis guidelines and position statements. ODS publication characteristics could help explain why ODS has received less attention in sinusitis guidelines and position statements. The purpose of this study was to explore trends in the quantity and quality of ODS studies over 3 decades from 1990 to 2019.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed to identify all ODS studies from 1990 to 2019. The following variables from all ODS studies were compared between and across the 3 decades: authors' specialties, journal specialties, authors' geographic origins (continents), study topics, study designs, and evidence levels.

RESULTS

From 1990 to 2019, there were 254 ODS studies that met inclusion criteria. Numbers of publications increased each decade, with 161 being published from 2010 to 2019. Otolaryngologists and dental authors published over 75% of ODS studies each decade, with 60-75% of ODS articles being published in otolaryngology or dental journals. European and Asian authors published the most ODS studies each decade. Overall, 92-100% of ODS publications per decade were level 4 and 5 evidence, with no significant changes between or across decades.

CONCLUSION

While numbers of ODS publications increased each decade from 1990 to 2019, evidence levels remained low without significant changes over time. Otolaryngologists and dental authors published the majority of ODS studies each decade, with a minority of these studies being multidisciplinary. More ODS studies are needed across all aspects of the condition, and future projects would benefit from improved study designs and multidisciplinary collaboration.

Diagnosing odontogenic sinusitis: An international multidisciplinary consensus statement

BACKGROUND

Odontogenic sinusitis (ODS) is distinct from non-odontogenic rhinosinusitis, and often requires multidisciplinary collaboration between otolaryngologists and dental providers to make the diagnosis. The purpose of this study was to develop international multidisciplinary consensus on diagnosing ODS.

METHODS

A modified Delphi method was used to assess for expert consensus on diagnosing bacterial ODS. A multidisciplinary panel of 17 authors with ODS expertise from 8 countries (8 otolaryngologists, 9 dental specialists) was assembled. Each author completed 2 of 3 surveys (2 specialty-specific, and 1 for all authors). Thirty-seven clinical statements were created, focusing on 4 important diagnostic components: suspecting ODS; confirming sinusitis in ODS; confirming different dental pathologies causing ODS; and multidisciplinary collaborative aspects of diagnosing ODS. Target audiences were all otolaryngologists and dental providers.

RESULTS

Of the 37 clinical statements, 36 reached consensus or strong consensus, and 1 reached no consensus. Strong consensus was reached that certain clinical and microbiologic features should arouse suspicion for ODS, and that multidisciplinary collaboration between otolaryngologists and dental providers is generally required to diagnose ODS. To diagnose ODS, otolaryngologists should confirm sinusitis mainly based on nasal endoscopic findings of middle meatal purulence, edema, or polyps, and dental providers should confirm dental pathology based on clinical examination and dental imaging.

CONCLUSION

Based on multidisciplinary international consensus, diagnosing ODS generally requires otolaryngologists to confirm sinusitis, and dental providers to confirm maxillary odontogenic pathology. Importantly, both dental providers and otolaryngologists should suspect ODS based on certain clinical features, and refer patients to appropriate providers for disease confirmation.

Imaging Findings in Non-Neoplastic Sinonasal Disease: Review of Imaging Features With Endoscopic Correlates

Non-neoplastic sinonasal disease is common and imaging often plays an important role in establishing the proper diagnosis, guiding clinical management, and evaluating for complications. Both computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging are commonly employed in the imaging evaluation and it is important to understand the imaging characteristics of the unique types of pathology affecting the sinonasal cavities. This article reviews a variety of infectious, inflammatory, and other non-neoplastic sinonasal pathologies, highlighting imaging features that aid in their differentiation.

Comparison of bacterial maxillary sinus cultures between odontogenic sinusitis and chronic rhinosinusitis

BACKGROUND

Bacterial odontogenic sinusitis (ODS) is distinct from other forms of rhinosinusitis. Diagnosing ODS can be challenging because of nonspecific clinical presentations and underrepresentation in the literature. The purpose of this study was to compare maxillary sinus bacterial cultures between patients with ODS and chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS), to determine whether certain bacteria are associated with ODS.

METHODS

This was a retrospective case-control study of 276 consecutive patients from August 2015 to August 2019 who underwent endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) for bacterial ODS, CRS without nasal polyps (CRSsNP), or CRS with nasal polyps (CRSwNP). When present, pus was sterilely cultured from maxillary sinuses after maxillary antrostomy, and aerobic and anaerobic cultures were immediately sent for processing. Demographics and culture results were compared between ODS and CRS patients, and then separately between ODS and CRSsNP, and ODS and CRSwNP. ODS culture results were also compared between different dental pathologies (endodontic vs oroantral fistula).

RESULTS

The following bacteria were significantly more likely in ODS compared to CRS: mixed anaerobes, Fusobacterium spp., Eikenella corrodens, Streptococcus intermedius, Streptococcus anginosus, and Streptococcus constellatus. Staphylococcus aureus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa were inversely related to ODS. There were no significant differences in cultures between the different dental pathologies.

CONCLUSION

Certain bacteria were more likely to be associated with ODS compared to CRS when purulence was cultured from the maxillary sinus. Physicians should evaluate for an odontogenic source of sinusitis when these ODS-associated bacteria are identified in maxillary sinus cultures.