Skip to main content
Download PDF

Cone-beam computed tomographic analysis of maxillary sinus septa among Yemeni population: a cross-sectional study

BMC Oral Health volume 23, Article number: 466 (2023) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

Maxillary sinus septa increase perforation risk of Schneiderian membrane during the sinus floor elevation (SFE). Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) allows for a more precise assessment of the septal position; thus, preoperative CBCT analysis is substantial to avoid possible complications. This study aims to investigate the 3D characteristics of the maxillary sinus septa based on CBCT images. To our knowledge, no study reported the CBCT-based investigation for the sinus septa among Yemeni population.

Materials and methods

This is a retrospective cross-sectional analysis of 880 sinus CBCT images 440 patients. The septa prevalence, locations, orientations, morphology, and associated factors were analyzed. The effect of age, gender, and dental status on the sinus septa and the relationship between sinus membrane pathology and sinus septa were also analyzed. Anatomage (Invivo version 6) was used for CBCT images analysis. Descriptive and analytical statistics were performed, and a P-value < 0.05 was significantly considered.

Results

The maxillary sinus septa were found among 63.9% of patients and 47% of sinuses. The average septa height was 5.2 mm. 15.7% of patients had septa in the right maxilla, 18% in the left, and 30.2% in both. Gender, age, and dental condition had no influence on the presence of septa, and septa presence did not influence sinus membrane pathology. Many septa originated from the floor (54.5%), located in the middle (43%), with coronal orientation (66%) and complete configuration (58.2%).

Conclusion

Based on our findings, the septa prevalence, locations, orientations, and morphology were significant and equivalent to the highest recorded in the literature yet. Thus, when sinus floor elevation is planned, CBCT imaging of the maxillary sinus is recommended for safe dental implantation.

Peer Review reports

Introduction

As the largest paranasal sinus, the maxillary sinus plays an essential role in pronunciation and resonance, reduces the skull weight, protects the skull base from trauma, and humidifies and warms the inhaled air [1]. The maxillary sinus has a pyramidal form, of which the base lies in the lateral wall of the nasal cavity and points towards the zygomatic process of the maxilla [2]. Maxillary sinus septa are cortical bone barriers or projections that develop from any interior wall of the sinus, first identified by Underwood in 1910; thus, it is also known as the Underwood septum [3].

Rehabilitation of patients with endosseous implants in the posterior maxilla may be hindered by pneumatization of the maxillary sinus and/or ridge atrophy. Sinus floor elevation (SFE) is one of the most reliable surgical techniques proposed to increase the bone volume for optimal implant placement [4, 5]. Nonetheless, it is a sensitive procedure that demands the surgical competence of the surgeons [6]. The most prevalent intraoperative complication is perforation of the Schneiderian membrane during SFE, which occurs in 11–56% of sinus floor elevation procedures [7, 8] that might lead to graft migration and sinus infection [2, 5]. Establishing an adequate surgical strategy and preventing intraoperative complications need detailed understanding of the maxillary sinus anatomy and variations before the SFE [9]. Maxillary sinus septa increase sinus membrane perforation during SFE [5]. It is one of the most prevalent maxillary sinus anatomical variations, with a prevalence ranging from 9 to 70% in patients and 13–58% in sinuses according to the diagnostic method [5, 10,11,12,13].

Sinus septa etiology remains unclear, and some studies have reported more maxillary sinus septa in edentulous than dentate subjects [7, 8]. It has been hypothesized that after tooth loss, edentulous maxillary sinuses may have additional septa due to pneumatization [14]. Previous studies have shown that panoramic radiographs are unreliable for identifying sinus septa [15]. Some authors showed that panoramic radiographs provide a mistaken diagnosis between 11.8% and 52.6% of the time compared to Computed Tomography (CT) [11]. Recent guidelines of the European Association of Osseointegration (EAO) and the International Team for Implantology (ITI) recommend preoperative Three-Dimensional (3D) imaging techniques, such as CT and CBCT imaging of the maxillary sinus and adjacent anatomical structures, to prevent SFE complications [14, 16]. It is prudent to use CBCT when evaluating maxillary sinuses as one of the greatest benefits is reducing the patient’s radiation exposure and cost [4, 6]. Before the surgical approach for SFE, it is essential to understand the locations and morphology of septa on CBCT scans to minimize membrane perforation [5, 14].

Since this study focused on Yemeni population, it is worth mentioning that habitual khat chewing in Yemen has a detrimental effect on oral and periodontal health status, which can cause pocket depth, gingival recession, and teeth loss on the chewing side among khat chewers [17,18,19,20]. Nevertheless, the correlation between khat chewing and the failure rate of dental implants has not yet been examined in the literature. Further, to our knowledge, no study has yet reported the CBCT-based investigation of sinus septa among Yemeni populations. The purpose of this study was to determine the prevalence and morphological variations of maxillary sinus septa, as well as their influence by age, gender, and dental status, in addition to the effect on the sinus membrane pathology. The null hypothesis was that no association between the maxillary sinus septa and gender, age, or dental status, as well as the sinus septa have no effect on sinus membrane pathology.

Materials and methods

Study Design and patients selection

This is a cross-sectional study conducted on 880 sinuses using CBCT images of 440 Yemeni patients from Sana’a and Taiz cities, the top largest population cities in The Republic of Yemen. The randomly selected CBCT images of the maxilla were picked up from stored data in the hospital system during the period from September 2019 to December 2021. All measurements were taken twice by the same observer at an interval of 8 weeks. The CBCT images were made for routine dental treatments. The institution’s policy includes patients’ consent to participate in any trial and approvals of using their data with a full explanation of the benefits and risks of any procedure.

The protocol of the study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Taiz University, Faculty of medicine and health science (ECTU2022/2–5). Moreover, all methods were carried out in accordance with the principles of the declaration of Helsinki.

Inclusion criteria

The patients of this study must be aged 18 years or above as well his/ her CBCT image of the complete bilateral maxillary sinuses was clear with good quality.

Exclusion criteria

The patient who met at least one of the following criteria was excluded; the patient whose age was less than 18 years; that because the growth of his/ her sinus was not completed yet, patients with a history of dental trauma or maxillary sinus surgery or dental implants or congenital diseases as cleft palate or experienced developmental anomaly in the domain of the maxillary sinus. The incomplete sinus CBCT image due to a small field of view (FOV) and the poor quality of CBCT images or artifacts due to various causes (beam hardening, noise, metal, and ring artifact) were also excluded.

Data Collection

Sociodemographic characterizations

The sociodemographic characterizations, including the age and gender of the patients who met the above inclusion criteria, were collected at the time of CBCT scanning and then recruited to investigate their anticipated effect on the septa parameters.

CBCT images acquisition and investigation

Vatech, Pax-i3D Green™ machine was used for CBCT imaging with 50–90 KVp and 4–16 mA for 7.2 s. Bilateral maxillary sinuses of all selected patients were fully observed and evaluated. Invivo Anatomage (version 6) was utilized to determine and/ or calculate the morphometric characters of the maxillary sinus septa (numbers, configurations, heights, locations, orientations, and morphology) and thickness of Schneiderian membrane The prevalence of maxillary sinus septs was determined in each sinus and patient on the sagittal, coronal, and axial sections of CBCT images. The threshold of septa height is at least 2.5 mm on the sagittal section by drawing a line from the base of septa to the highest point Fig. 1(a). Further, on both sagittal and coronal sections, the membrane thickening was measured by drawing a line from the base of sinus to the highest point of the membrane Fig. 1(b, c), maxillary sinus pathology as healthy or unhealthy based on thickening of the sinus mucosa, and the cutoff point that more than 3 mm Fig. 1(d). The location was determined in accordance with the presence or absence of teeth into the anterior: in the region corresponding to premolars, middle: in the region above first and second molars and posterior: in the region distal to the second molar Fig. 2. A sinus with more than one septum was considered multiple septa, and when extended from one wall to another wall named complete septa Fig. 3. Septa presence in both sides were known as bilateral sinus septa with the orientation either sagittal, coronal or axial Fig. 4.

Statistical analysis

Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) software (version 24, IBM Corp.) was employed for data entry and analysis. A descriptive statistic for the studied variables was calculated. The Effect of Gender, Age, and Dental Status on the Septa was estimated by Chi square test. The normal distribution (Kolmogorov-Smirnov test) of the related variables were initially identified to specify either parametric or nonparametric tests will be applied. The influence of septa on sinus membrane pathology was estimated by Chi square test. The P value < 0.05 was significantly considered.

Fig. 1
figure 1

(a) Determination the septum height on the sagittal section, (b) Coronal view of sinus membrane thickness measurement in edentulous sinus ridge, (c) sagittal view of membrane thickness measurement in the dentate ridge and (d) measurement of both septum height and membrane thickness in pathological maxillary sinus as unhealthy sinus membrane

Full size image
Fig. 2
figure 2

Sagittal CBCT sections showing several septa locations (a) anterior, (b) middle, (c) posterior

Full size image
Fig. 3
figure 3

(a) Sagittal section of multiple and complete sinus septa (b) 3D view of maxillary sinus septa

Full size image
Fig. 4
figure 4

(a) axial section of bilateral complete septa (b) sagittal section of multiple and complete septa with coronal and sagittal orientation

Full size image

Results

Sociodemographic characterizations

More than 2000 CBCT images of the maxilla were initially evaluated using the Invivo Anatomage program (version 6). The included CBCT images of 440 patients for 880 maxillary sinuses (approximately 22%) were fit to this study according to the mentioned inclusion and exclusion criteria above and hence were selected for further evaluation. The sociodemographic and related variables of the selected patients are presented in Table 1. Among 440 patients, 259 (58.9%) were females, and 181 (41.1%) were males. The patient’s age was divided into four groups; less than 24 years old group (25%), 25–34 years old group (25.2%), 35–44 years old group (18.2%), and more than 45 years old group (31.6%). The septa were found in the maxillary right sinus of 69 (15.7%) of the study patients, 79 (18%) in left sinus, and 133 (30.2%) bilaterally. Overall, the septa were found in 63.9% (281/440) of patients and 47% (414/880) of sinus segments. The average height of the sinus septa was 5.18 ± 2.23 mm as shown in Table 2. The maximum number of septa in a single sinus was higher in the left (5 septa) compared to the right (4 septa). As shown in Table S1, 70.9% (624/880) of the maxillary sinus membrane in both sides were healthy with the sinus membrane thickness was 3 mm or less. 63.8% (561/880) of sinuses were fully dentate while 22.1(195/880) were partially dentate and 14.1% (124/880) were complete edentulous sinus ridges.

Configurations, locations, Origins, and orientations of Septa

The common configuration of septa was complete on both maxillary sides; 154 (27.5%) on the right and 172 (30.7%) on the left as a complete versus 112 (20%) and 122 (21.8%) as right and left partial septa, respectively Table S2. The results showed that both septa configuration (complete and partial) were found more on the left than on the right side.

It is clear that most of the septa were located in the middle of both maxillary sides, 117 (20.9%) on the right side and 124 (22.1%) on the left side, (43%) in both sides. However, 103 (18.4%) and 112 (20%) of septa were located in the anterior of the right and left, respectively, and (38.4%) in both sides. The posterior contained the least numbers of septa; 46 (8.2%) in the right and 58 (10.4%) in the left, and (18.6%) in both sides. According to the origin, the numerous septa originated from floor; 155 (27.7%) on the right side and 150 (26.8%) on the left side, and (54.5%) in both sides.

The most frequent of the septa orientation was coronal; 180 (32.1%) on the right side and 190 (33.9%) on the left side, and (66%) in both sides, followed by sagittal; 85 (15.2%) on the right side and 103 (18.4%) in the left side. The axial orientation is the least since only one septum for each side was found.

Table 1 Socio-demographic characterizations of the study patients
Full size table
Table 2 Height of septa on both maxillary sides
Full size table

Effect of the gender, Age, Sinus membrane Status, and Dental Status on the Septa

The effects of gender, age, sinus membrane status, and dental status on the presence of septa are individually presented in Table 3. The Chi square test results showed that gender and sinus membrane status exerted no significant effect on the septa (P = 0.226 and 0.354, respectively). On the same line, the Chi square test results showed that age and dental status exerted no significant effect on the septa (P = 0.567 and 0.506, respectively). The number of septa in the maxillary right and left sides according to age, gender, sinus membrane status, and dental status are presented in Table S3.

Table 3 Effect of sociodemographic factors on the septa of the study patients
Full size table

Effect of the Presence and absence of Septa on the Sinus membrane Pathology

The mean thickness of the maxillary right side membranes in the presence and absence of septa was 4.74 ± 1.60 mm and 4.96 ± 2.22 mm, respectively Table 4; which showed no significant difference (P = 0.789). The mean thickness of the maxillary left side membranes in the presence and absence of septa were 5.14 ± 2.40 mm and 5.11 ± 2.52 mm, respectively, which showed no significant difference (P = 0.806).

Table 4 Thickness of membrane in the maxillary right and left sides according to presence and absence of septa
Full size table

Discussion

Sinus septa variations and morphology

The present study findings found maxillary sinus septa in about two third of the patients (63.9%), and half of the sinuses exhibited septa (47%), which was noteworthy and equivalent to the literature and consistent with previous studies that showed a prevalence ranging from 9 to 70% in patients and 13–58% in sinuses [5, 10,11,12, 16]. In the literature, the prevalence of maxillary sinus septa varies significantly between studies of various nations and ethnicities. China, Korea, Brazil, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and South Africa reported rates of 46.9%, 22.93%, 27%, 44,4%, 44.8%, 45.9%, 47.6%, and 69%, respectively [4, 21,22,23,24,25,26,27]. The sample size, criteria of septa (2–4 mm height), races and nations, and imaging modalities (CBCT, CT, panoramic, surgical observation, cadavers) could influence the different septa prevalence rates [21].

The septa were more prevalent unilaterally 33.7% (left 18% and right 15.7%) compared to bilateral (30.2%) in both sinuses. The maximum number of septa in a single sinus was higher in the left (5 septa) compared to the right (4 septa). Further, the septa were more prevalent in males than females, which is consistent with most previously published studies [4, 11]. However, Park et al. found the prevalence of septa to be higher among females [28].

In the present study, most septa were located on the floor with middle position and coronal orientation. About 43% were located in the middle region, 38.4% was located in the anterior region, and 18.6% were located in the posterior region. The most common orientations of the septa were coronal (66%), followed by sagittal (33.6%), and axial (0.4%) directions. The present study is in line with the previous studies that reported a majority of septa were oriented in the coronal/buccopalatal /transverse direction in a range of 61.8–87.6% [29].

The presence of maxillary sinus septa was significantly higher in the middle region in both the right and left sinuses, agreeing with systematic review studies that found the septa were positioned in the middle region [5, 11, 12, 30, 31], corresponding to first and second molars [22, 31] in the range between 35.7 and 70.94% and divided the sinus into two or more sections with a coronal orientation. However, some authors have demonstrated a higher rate of septa coincidence in the posterior molars [2, 3]. Nevertheless, our results are inconsistent with some authors who found that the highest rate of maxillary septa prevalence was located anteriorly [7, 32].

These results reveal the clinical importance for implant surgical procedures. A higher number of septa were observed in the first and second molar (middle) region, with coronal orientation, since the first and second molar regions are among those with the most bone loss after tooth extraction and often necessitating SFE treatments. According to classification system from Irinakis et al., the coronal orientation represents a lower risk of membrane perforation as Class I septa orientation increases the predictability of treatment unless it has a combination with other orientations as in Class IV [33].

In the present study, the average height of the septa of the maxillary right and left sides were 5.04 and 5.32 mm, respectively, with the entire mean of 5.6 mm, which was consistent with the septa average height of the previous studies in the range of 5.4–7.3 mm [4, 28, 29].

Effect of the gender, Age, and Dental Status on the Septa

The present study indicated no significant correlation between the prevalence of septa and patient age or gender, which is consistent with prior studies [9, 24, 30, 34, 35]. Other studies showed a negative correlation only between septa and gender [2, 22, 36,37,38].

The present study found no relationship between dental status (dentate, partially edentulous, edentulous) and the prevalence of septa (63.8% of dentate, 22.1% of partially edentulous, and 14.1% of edentulous). This finding is consistent with Shen et al. [22] who observed no correlation between septa prevalence and the absence of maxillary first or second molars, consistent with recent studies [2, 14, 21, 24, 38, 39]. The present study contradicts other studies [35, 40, 41] which showed edentulous ridges have more septa than dentate ridges, as concluded by Krennmair et al. and Kim et al., who proposed the hypothesis that atrophic edentulous maxilla considers secondary septa [42, 43].

Primary/congenital and secondary/acquired classification of maxillary sinus septa has limited clinical significance since septa can appear anywhere in the maxillary sinus and do not emerge as a result of sinus pneumatization following tooth loss [14]. The etiology of septa formation is unknown, but genetics may affect septa formation during middle-face region development. Hence, maxillary sinus septa should be classified based on their location, orientation, and morphology since they are clinically significant during SFE procedures. Septa cause 11–56% of sinus membrane perforations during SFE [14, 24, 44].

Effect of the Presence and absence of Septa on the Sinus membrane Pathology

The prevalence of mucosal thickening ranged between 35.1 and 66%, and thickening is considered normal between 1 and 3 mm [13]. The perforation rate was higher in thicker (≥ 2 mm) and thinner membranes (< 1 mm) according to Lin YH et al. [45]. In the present study, the reference for maxillary sinus pathology as healthy or unhealthy was Bronstein et al.[44] who diagnosed the pathology of maxillary sinus according to thickening of the sinus mucosa and the cutoff point of more than 3 mm, beyond which mucosal thickening of the maxillary sinus is regarded as pathological, we followed Ata Ali et al. and Vogiatzi et al.[13, 46].

The present study found no significant correlation between Sinus Membrane Pathology and the presence or absence of septa on both the right and left sides (P = 0.789 and P = 0.806), respectively. Findings from N. Kocak et al. in 2019 matched our results and observed no significant difference (P = 0.863) between septa presence and maximum membrane mucosal thickness in 376 patients and 500 sinuses [24]. By contrast, Cakur et al. reported that sinus septa might cause the Schneiderian membrane’s thinness, as membrane thickness is inversely related to sinus septa [47]. However, Rancitelli et al. found no positive correlation between septa height and membrane thickness. The thickness of the membrane at the septa origin is almost twice as thick as it is away from the septa origin [48].

The present study to the best of our knowledge, is the first study that is focused on the relation between maxillary sinus septa and maxillary sinus pathology (healthy and unhealthy), unlike the previous studies that studied the relation between sinus septa and sinus membrane in the position of septa. The present study has common limitation that is a cross-sectional evaluation of CBCT images from only two cities; thus, the findings cannot be generalized to all populations and the measurements matched by single observer. Therefore, future studies are strongly recommended to confirm the present findings.

Conclusion

Based on our findings, the prevalence of septa among Yemeni population were 63.9% in patients and 47% in sinuses. Many septa were completed (58.2%), located in the middle (43%), originated from the floor (54.5%), and oriented coronally (66%). It’s noteworthy to mention that the prevalence of septa was significant and equivalent to the highest recorded in the literature yet. The sociodemographic (gender and age) and dental status (dentate, partially dentate, and edentulous) do not affect the presence of septa, nor does the septa presence influence the sinus membrane pathology. Therefore, preoperative CBCT imaging of the maxillary sinus is recommended for safe dental implantation, particularly when sinus floor elevation is planned.

Data Availability

All datasets and materials used and analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Abbreviations

CBCT:

Cone Beam Computed Tomography

SFE:

Sinus Floor Elevation

CT:

Computed Tomography

3D:

Three-Dimensional

EAO:

European Association of Osseointegration

ITI:

International Team for Implantology

References

  1. Testori T, Wallace SS, Del Fabbro M, Taschieri S, Trisi P, Capelli M, Weinstein RL. Repair of large sinus membrane perforations using stabilized collagen barrier membranes: surgical techniques with histologic and radiographic evidence of success. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2008;28(1):9–17.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Sigaroudi AK, Kajan ZD, Rastgar S, Asli HN. Frequency of different maxillary sinus septal patterns found on cone-beam computed tomography and predicting the associated risk of sinus membrane perforation during sinus lifting. Imaging Sci Dentistry. 2017;47(4):261–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Underwood AS. An Inquiry into the anatomy and Pathology of the Maxillary Sinus. J Anat Physiol. 1910;44(Pt 4):354–69.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Al-Zahrani MS, Al-Ahmari MM, Al-Zahrani AA, Al-Mutairi KD, Zawawi KH. Prevalence and morphological variations of maxillary sinus septa in different age groups: a CBCT analysis. Ann Saudi Med. 2020;40(3):200–6.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Henriques I, Caramês J, Francisco H, Caramês G, Hernández-Alfaro F, Marques D. Prevalence of maxillary sinus septa: systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2022;51(6):823–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Taleghani F, Tehranchi M, Shahab S, Zohri Z. Prevalence, location, and size of Maxillary Sinus Septa: computed tomography scan analysis. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2017;18(1):11–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Krennmair G, Ulm CW, Lugmayr H, Solar P. The incidence, location, and height of maxillary sinus septa in the edentulous and dentate maxilla. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1999;57(6):667–71. discussion 671 – 662.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Gandhi KR, Wabale RN, Siddiqui AU, Farooqui MS. The incidence and morphology of maxillary sinus septa in dentate and edentulous maxillae: a cadaveric study with a brief review of the literature. J Korean Association Oral Maxillofacial Surg. 2015;41(1):30–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Neugebauer J, Ritter L, Mischkowski RA, Dreiseidler T, Scherer P, Ketterle M, Rothamel D, Zöller JE. Evaluation of maxillary sinus anatomy by cone-beam CT prior to sinus floor elevation. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2010;25(2):258–65.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Maestre-Ferrín L, Galán-Gil S, Rubio-Serrano M, Peñarrocha-Diago M, Peñarrocha-Oltra D. Maxillary sinus septa: a systematic review. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2010;15(2):e383–386.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Malec M, Smektała T, Trybek G, Sporniak-Tutak K. Maxillary sinus septa: prevalence, morphology, diagnostics and implantological implications. Systematic review. Folia Morphol. 2014;73(3):259–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Pommer B, Ulm C, Lorenzoni M, Palmer R, Watzek G, Zechner W. Prevalence, location and morphology of maxillary sinus septa: systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Periodontol. 2012;39(8):769–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Ata-Ali J, Diago-Vilalta JV, Melo M, Bagán L, Soldini MC, Di-Nardo C, Ata-Ali F, Mañes-Ferrer JF. What is the frequency of anatomical variations and pathological findings in maxillary sinuses among patients subjected to maxillofacial cone beam computed tomography? A systematic review. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2017;22(4):e400–9.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Schriber M, von Arx T, Sendi P, Jacobs R, Suter VG, Bornstein MM. Evaluating Maxillary Sinus Septa using Cone Beam Computed Tomography: is there a difference in frequency and type between the dentate and edentulous posterior Maxilla? Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2017;32(6):1324–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Kasabah S, Slezák R, Simůnek A, Krug J, Lecaro M. Evaluation of the Accuracy of Panoramic Radiograph in the definition of Maxillary Sinus Septa. Acta medica (Hradec Králové) / Universitas Carolina. Facultas Med Hradec Králové. 2002;45:173–5.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Bornstein MM, Scarfe WC, Vaughn VM, Jacobs R. Cone beam computed tomography in implant dentistry: a systematic review focusing on guidelines, indications, and radiation dose risks. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2014;29 Suppl:55–77.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Sultan M, Alhadad KA, Alsanaban F. Tooth lost and gingival recession as a risk factor of khat chewing in Yemen. Cairo Dent J 2008(2):171–6.

  18. Sadeq-Ali A-M, AlAkhali M. Oral hygiene and periodontal health status among khat chewers. A case-control study. J Clin experimental dentistry. 2017;9(5):e629.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Al-Kholani AI. Influence of khat chewing on periodontal tissues and oral hygiene status among Yemenis. Dent Res J. 2010;7(1):1.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Al-akhali MS, Al‐Moraissi EA. Khat chewing habit produces a significant adverse effect on periodontal, oral health: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. J Periodontal Res. 2017;52(6):937–45.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Wang W, Jin L, Ge H, Zhang F. Analysis of the Prevalence, Location, and Morphology of Maxillary Sinus Septa in a Northern Chinese Population by Cone Beam Computed Tomography. Computational and Mathematical Methods in Medicine 2022, 2022.

  22. Shen EC, Fu E, Chiu TJ, Chang V, Chiang CY, Tu HP. Prevalence and location of maxillary sinus septa in the taiwanese population and relationship to the absence of molars. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012;23(6):741–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Sakhdari S, Panjnoush M, Eyvazlou A, Niktash A. Determination of the prevalence, height, and location of the Maxillary Sinus Septa using Cone Beam Computed Tomography. Implant Dent. 2016;25(3):335–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Kocak N, Alpoz E, Boyacıoglu H. Morphological Assessment of Maxillary Sinus Septa Variations with Cone-Beam Computed Tomography in a turkish Population. Eur J Dent. 2019;13(1):42–6.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Lana JP, Carneiro PM, Machado Vde C, de Souza PE, Manzi FR, Horta MC. Anatomic variations and lesions of the maxillary sinus detected in cone beam computed tomography for dental implants. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012;23(12):1398–403.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Lee WJ, Lee SJ, Kim HS. Analysis of location and prevalence of maxillary sinus septa. J Periodontal Implant Sci. 2010;40(2):56–60.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. van Zyl AW, van Heerden WF. A retrospective analysis of maxillary sinus septa on reformatted computerised tomography scans. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2009;20(12):1398–401.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Park YB, Jeon HS, Shim JS, Lee KW, Moon HS. Analysis of the anatomy of the maxillary sinus septum using 3-dimensional computed tomography. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2011;69(4):1070–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Dandekeri SS, Hegde C, Kavassery P, Sowmya MK, Shetty B. CBCT Study of Morphologic Variations of Maxillary Sinus Septa in Relevance to Sinus Augmentation Procedures. Ann Maxillofac Surg. 2020;10(1):51–6.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Maestre-Ferrín L, Carrillo-García C, Galán-Gil S, Peñarrocha-Diago M, Peñarrocha-Diago M. Prevalence, location, and size of Maxillary Sinus Septa: panoramic Radiograph Versus Computed Tomography scan. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2011;69(2):507–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Alhumaidan G, Eltahir MA, Shaikh SS. Retrospective analysis of maxillary sinus septa–A cone beam computed tomography study. Saudi Dent J. 2021;33(7):467–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Ulm CW, Solar P, Krennmair G, Matejka M, Watzek G. Incidence and suggested surgical management of septa in sinus-lift procedures. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1995;10(4):462–5.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Irinakis T, Dabuleanu V, Aldahlawi S. Complications during maxillary sinus augmentation associated with interfering septa: a new classification of septa. The open dentistry journal. 2017;11:140.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Beretta M, Cicciù M, Bramanti E, Maiorana C. Schneider membrane elevation in presence of sinus septa: anatomic features and surgical management. Int J Dent. 2012;2012:261905.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Hungerbühler A, Rostetter C, Lübbers H-T, Rücker M, Stadlinger B. Anatomical characteristics of maxillary sinus septa visualized by cone beam computed tomography. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2019;48(3):382–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Talo Yildirim T, Güncü GN, Colak M, Nares S, Tözüm TF. Evaluation of maxillary sinus septa: a retrospective clinical study with cone beam computerized tomography (CBCT). Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2017;21(23):5306–14.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Neychev D, Kanazirska P, Simitchiev K, Yordanov G. CBCT images: an important tool in the analysis of anatomical variations of maxillary sinus related to Underwood septa features. Biotechnol Biotechnol Equip. 2017;31(6):1210–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Furtado DM, Martins-Júnior PA, Alves TK, Santos RM, Coutinho DC, Neto IS, Vidigal BC, de Oliveira GA, Alves ESMR, Manzi FR. Prevalence and characterization of maxillary sinus septa in a brazilian population. J Clin Exp Dent. 2021;13(7):e642–7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Palma V, Rosa A, Semenoff T, de Musis C, Bueno M, Porto A, Semenoff Segundo A. Evaluation of septa frequency in the maxillary sinuses with edentulous and dentulous areas through computed tomography. Oral Surg. 2013;6(2):67–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Toprak M, Ataç M. Maxillary sinus septa and anatomical correlation with the dentition type of sinus region: a cone beam computed tomographic study. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2021;59(4):419–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Qian L, Tian X-m, Zeng L, Gong Y, Wei B. Analysis of the morphology of maxillary sinus septa on reconstructed cone-beam computed tomography images. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2016;74(4):729–37.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Krennmair G, Ulm C, Lugmayr H. Maxillary sinus septa: incidence, morphology and clinical implications. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 1997;25(5):261–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Kim MJ, Jung UW, Kim CS, Kim KD, Choi SH, Kim CK, Cho KS. Maxillary sinus septa: prevalence, height, location, and morphology. A reformatted computed tomography scan analysis. J Periodontol. 2006;77(5):903–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Bornstein MM, Seiffert C, Maestre-Ferrín L, Fodich I, Jacobs R, Buser D, von Arx T. An analysis of frequency, morphology, and locations of Maxillary Sinus Septa using Cone Beam Computed Tomography. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2016;31(2):280–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Lin YH, Yang YC, Wen SC, Wang HL. The influence of sinus membrane thickness upon membrane perforation during lateral window sinus augmentation. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2016;27(5):612–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Vogiatzi T, Kloukos D, Scarfe WC, Bornstein MM. Incidence of anatomical variations and disease of the maxillary sinuses as identified by cone beam computed tomography: a systematic review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2014;29(6):1301–14.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Cakur B, Sümbüllü MA, Durna D. Relationship among schneiderian membrane, Underwood’s septa, and the maxillary sinus inferior border. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2013;15(1):83–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Rancitelli D, Borgonovo AE, Cicciù M, Re D, Rizza F, Frigo AC, Maiorana C. Maxillary sinus Septa and anatomic correlation with the Schneiderian membrane. J Craniofac Surg. 2015;26(4):1394–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Dr. Mujeeb Alhosami, Ph.D., for his insightful comments on the manuscript and Mr. Waleed Alsharabi for technical support.

Funding

Young Clinical Research Fund of the Chinese Stomatological Association: CSA-SIS2022-19.

Sichuan Science and Technology Program : 2023NSFSC0567.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. State Key Laboratory of Oral Diseases & National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases, West China School of Stomatology, Sichuan University, Chengdu, 610041, China

    Bassam A. Altayar, Weimin Lin, Quan Yuan & Mingyue Lyu

  2. State Key Laboratory of Oral Diseases & National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases, Department of Oral Implantology, West China School of Stomatology, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China

    Bassam A. Altayar, Weimin Lin, Saddam N. Al-wesabi, Quan Yuan & Mingyue Lyu

  3. Dentistry Division, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Taiz University, Taiz, Yemen

    Barakat Al-Tayar

  4. State Key Laboratory of Oral Diseases & National Clinical Research Centre for Oral Diseases, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, West China School of Stomatology, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China

    Eissa A. Al-shujaa & Karim Sakran

Authors
  1. Bassam A. Altayar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Barakat Al-Tayar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Weimin Lin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Saddam N. Al-wesabi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Eissa A. Al-shujaa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Karim Sakran
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Quan Yuan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Mingyue Lyu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

BAA. and BA; collection and analysis of the data. BAA and WL; writing the original draft. SNA and EAA; Conceptualization and methodology. KS; statistical analysis, QY; supervision the study. ML; critical revisions of the article. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Quan Yuan or Mingyue Lyu.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

This cross-sectional study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Taiz University, Faculty of medicine and health sciences (No: ECTU2022/2–5). Informed consent was obtained from all subjects before the study. Moreover, all methods were carried out in accordance with the principles of the declaration of Helsinki.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Additional File 1: Table S1

Number of septa in the maxillary right side versus number of septa in the maxillary left side of all study subjects; Table S2 Configuration, locations, origins and orientations of septa in the right and left sides; Table S3 Numbers of septa according to age, gender, sinus membrane status, and dental status

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Altayar, B.A., Al-Tayar, B., Lin, W. et al. Cone-beam computed tomographic analysis of maxillary sinus septa among Yemeni population: a cross-sectional study. BMC Oral Health 23, 466 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-023-03124-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-023-03124-6

Keywords

BMC Oral Health

ISSN: 1472-6831

Contact us