-
Dento Maxillo Facial Radiology Jul 2023A systematic review was performed to evaluate the performance of panoramic radiography (PR) CT or cone beam CT (CBCT) in the diagnosis of pathological maxillary sinuses. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Performance of panoramic radiography compared with computed tomography in the evaluation of pathological changes in the maxillary sinuses: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
OBJECTIVE
A systematic review was performed to evaluate the performance of panoramic radiography (PR) CT or cone beam CT (CBCT) in the diagnosis of pathological maxillary sinuses.
METHODS
This review was registered in the PROSPERO database under the number CRD42020211766. Observational studies that compared PR with CT/CBCT were used to evaluate pathological changes in the maxillary sinuses. A complete search of seven primary databases and gray literature was carried out. The risk of bias was assessed according to the Newcastle-Ottawa tool, and the GRADE tool was used to assess the quality of evidence. A binary meta-analysis was performed to assess the effectiveness of evaluating pathological alterations in the maxillary sinuses in PR and CT/CBCT.
RESULTS
Seven studies were included in our study, out of which four were included in a quantitative analysis. All studies were classified as low risk of bias. Five studies compared PR with CBCT and two studies compared PR to CT. The most common pathological alteration in maxillary sinuses reported was mucosal thickening. CT/CBCT was seen to be the most effective method for assessing pathological changes in the maxillary sinus when compared to PR (RR = 0.19, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.05 to 0.70, = 0.01).
CONCLUSION
CT/CBCT are the most appropriate imaging methods to evaluate pathological changes in the maxillary sinuses, while PR is still limited in the evaluation of these changes being considered only for initial diagnosis.
Topics: Humans; Maxillary Sinus; Radiography, Panoramic; Tomography, X-Ray Computed; Cone-Beam Computed Tomography
PubMed: 37192021
DOI: 10.1259/dmfr.20230067 -
Journal of Clinical and Experimental... Jul 2022Lung cancer is one of the leading causes of death worldwide. Lung cancer metastasis to oral region is very rare. Very few research work has been conducted till date to... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Lung cancer is one of the leading causes of death worldwide. Lung cancer metastasis to oral region is very rare. Very few research work has been conducted till date to analyse the jaw bone metastasis from Lung cancer as the primary source. The goal of this research was to examine published cases of jaw bone metastasis from lung cancer as the sole primary source from 1st December 1961 to 31st December 2021 and to learn about their characteristics.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
An electronic search of the published English literature was performed in PubMed/ Medline, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Research gate databases, using keywords like 'Lung cancer', OR/AND 'Lung carcinoma', OR/AND 'Metastasis', OR/AND 'Primary', OR/AND 'Source', OR/AND 'Oral cavity' OR/AND 'Jaw', OR/ AND 'Mandible', OR/AND 'Maxilla', OR/ AND 'Temporomandibular joint', OR/ AND 'Condyle', OR/ AND 'Ramus', OR/ AND 'Maxillary sinus', AND Initial', OR/ AND 'Treatment', OR/AND 'Prognosis', OR/ AND 'Follow-up', OR/AND 'Recurrence', OR/ AND 'Survival rate'. We also searched all related journals manually. Reference list of all articles was also checked. Data extracted were tabulated and summarized.
RESULTS
In total, we found 60 relevant publications with 66 patients in our research. The prognosis was poor, with a survival time of 1 week to 1.5 years. The most prevalent diagnosed metastatic lung cancer to jaw bones was adenocarcinoma and mandible was the predominant site.
CONCLUSIONS
Jaw bone metastasis from lung cancer is rare and has a bad prognosis. Because of their resemblance to other jaw problems and late clinical signs, these lesions go unnoticed the majority of the time, making detection difficult. More cases need to be published in order to raise awareness of these lesions and gain a better understanding of their characteristics. Jaw bone, lung cancer, metastasis, primary, prognosis.
PubMed: 35912028
DOI: 10.4317/jced.59554 -
International Journal of Implant... May 2021Currently, insufficient bone volume always occurs in the posterior maxilla which makes implantation difficult. Short implants combined with transcrestal sinus floor... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Currently, insufficient bone volume always occurs in the posterior maxilla which makes implantation difficult. Short implants combined with transcrestal sinus floor elevation (TSFE) may be an option to address insufficient bone volume.
PURPOSE
The clinical performance of short implants combined with TSFE was compared with that of conventional implants combined with TSFE according to the survival rate.
METHOD
In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we followed the Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) guidelines. Articles were identified through PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and manual searching. Eligibility criteria included clinical human studies. The quality assessment was performed according to the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) guidelines. The odds ratio (OR) with its confidence interval (CI) was considered the essential outcome for estimating the effect of short implants combined with TSFE.
RESULTS
The registration number is INPLASY202050092. Eleven studies met the inclusion criteria, including 1 cohort study and 10 cross-sectional studies. With respect to the 1-year survival rate, no significant effect was observed between short implants (length ≤ 8 mm) and conventional implants combined with TSFE (I=0%, OR=1.04, 95% CI: 0.55-1.96). Similarly, no difference was seen between the two groups regarding the survival rate during the healing period (I=10%, OR=0.74, 95% CI: 0.28-1.97) and 3-year loading (OR=1.76, 95% CI: 0.65-4.74).
CONCLUSION
There was no evidence that the survival rate of short implants combined with TSFE was lower or higher than that of conventional implants combined with TSFE when the residual bone height was poor and the implant protrusion length of short implants was less than or similar to conventional implants. Nevertheless, the results should be interpreted cautiously due to the lack of random controlled trials in our meta-analysis.
Topics: Cohort Studies; Cross-Sectional Studies; Maxillary Sinus; Observational Studies as Topic; Sinus Floor Augmentation; Survival Rate
PubMed: 34013452
DOI: 10.1186/s40729-021-00325-y -
International Journal of Implant... Aug 2021The aim of this study is to evaluate the implant survival/success rate, gain in alveolar bone height, crestal bone loss, and complications associated with implants... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The aim of this study is to evaluate the implant survival/success rate, gain in alveolar bone height, crestal bone loss, and complications associated with implants placed in the posterior maxilla after osteotome sinus floor elevation without bone substitutes.
METHODS
The electronic databases, such as MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and SCOPUS were systematically and manually searched for publications in peer-reviewed journals. The included articles were subjected to qualitative and quantitative analyses, and the meta-analysis was carried out for single-arm studies. Methodological quality assessment was made for all the included studies.
RESULTS
The included studies were of moderate quality, with the overall implant success and survival rates of 98.3% and 97.9% respectively. The most frequent intra-surgical complication was sinus membrane perforation, accounting for 3.08% of the total implants with reported perforations. The overall crestal bone loss in patients with immediate implants placed with OSFE after a 5-year follow-up was 0.957 mm 95%CI (0.538, 1.377).
CONCLUSION
Within the limitations of this review, it can be concluded that the survival and success rates of implants placed immediately along with OSFE without any bone substitutes are acceptable and show adequate implant stability with less crestal bone loss over 5 years.
Topics: Bone Transplantation; Humans; Maxillary Sinus; Osteotomy; Sinus Floor Augmentation; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 34368916
DOI: 10.1186/s40729-021-00358-3 -
International Journal of Implant... Apr 2018Minimally invasive antral membrane balloon elevation was introduced as a less traumatic technique in sinus floor elevation surgery. This is the first systematic review... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Minimally invasive antral membrane balloon elevation was introduced as a less traumatic technique in sinus floor elevation surgery. This is the first systematic review to assess the results of previous studies utilizing this technique.
AIMS OF THE STUDY
The objectives of this study were to assess the bone gain, sinus augmentation success rate, implant survival rate, and complications with minimally invasive antral membrane balloon elevation technique in comparison with the sinus floor elevation by traditional transalveolar technique (Summers' technique).
MATERIALS AND METHODS
An electronic search including MEDLINE (PubMed) and Cochrane database sites was conducted and supported by manual searching for articles on minimally invasive antral membrane balloon elevation from 1945 to 16 January 2017. Sometimes the researchers were contacted to fill the missing information which was not mentioned in their articles.
RESULTS
The extracted articles which involved utilization of balloon technique in maxillary sinus floor elevation surgery were 27 articles, among which only 10 articles met the inclusion criteria. The average of schneiderian membrane perforation with minimally invasive antral membrane balloon elevation (MIAMBE) technique was 6.76%. The sinus augmentation success rate ranged from 100 to 71.4% with average of 91.6%. Bone gain with this technique could reach for more than 10 mm with an average of 6.96 mm.
CONCLUSIONS
Minimally invasive antral membrane balloon elevation combined the beneficial points of both lateral window approach and transalveolar approach in which it produced ≥ 10 mm of gained bone in minimally invasive manner. Anyhow, long follow-up period is needed to accurately identify the long-term success rate of dental implants placed with this technique.
PubMed: 29663095
DOI: 10.1186/s40729-018-0123-9 -
Journal of Neurological Surgery. Part... Jul 2021The objective of this study is to describe the clinical presentation, tumor characteristics, natural history, and treatment patterns of sinonasal osteosarcoma....
The objective of this study is to describe the clinical presentation, tumor characteristics, natural history, and treatment patterns of sinonasal osteosarcoma. Fourteen patients who had been treated for osteosarcoma of the nasal cavity and paranasal sinuses at a tertiary care center were reviewed. In addition, a systematic review of the literature for osteosarcoma of the sinonasal cavity was performed. In a systematic review, including 14 patients from the authors' institution, 53 total studies including 88 patients were assessed. Median follow-up was 18 months (interquartile range: 8-39 months). The most common presenting symptoms were facial mass or swelling (34%), and nasal obstruction (30%). The most common paranasal sinus involved by tumor was the maxillary sinus (64%), followed by the ethmoid sinuses (52%). The orbit (33%), dura (13%) and infratemporal fossa (10%) were the most common sites of local invasion. The majority of patients underwent surgery followed by adjuvant therapy (52.4%). Increasing age was associated with decreased overall survival rate (unit risk ratio [95% confidence interval (CI)] = 1.02 [1.003-1.043]; = 0.0216) and T4 disease was associated with decreased disease-specific survival rate (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.87; = 0.0495). The 2- and 5-year overall survival rates were 68 and 40%, respectively, while 2- and 5-year disease-specific survival rates were 71% and 44%, respectively. Sinonasal osteosarcomas are uncommon tumors and can pose a significant therapeutic challenge. Increasing age and T4 disease are associated with worse prognosis. This disease usually warrants consultation by a multidisciplinary team and consideration of multimodality therapy.
PubMed: 34306929
DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1701221 -
Journal of the Formosan Medical... Apr 2016The purpose of this systematic review is to update the available data for complications following orthognathic surgery in cleft lip and/or palate patients. (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND/PURPOSE
The purpose of this systematic review is to update the available data for complications following orthognathic surgery in cleft lip and/or palate patients.
METHODS
Three electronic databases (Medline, Embase, and Cochrane) were searched for publications from 1990 to 2014.
RESULTS
A total of 26 articles were selected including 1003 patients (male: 391, female: 353, 259: not mentioned) who underwent maxillary osteotomies for cleft lip/palate. Mean age at surgery was 19.3 years (range: 8.5-60 years). Overall perioperative complications were reported in 126 cases (12.76%). The most common complication was closure failure of pre-existing palatal fistula (28.57%), followed by velopharyngeal impairment (16.79%), closure failure of pre-existing alveolar fistula (10.74%), gingival recession (4.55%), and failure of premaxilla stabilization in bilateral cases (4.55%). Severe vascular complications included one arteriovenous fistula (0.10%), one maxillary aneurysm (0.10%), and one cavernous sinus thrombosis (0.10%). Mean horizontal relapse rate was 17.9% (range: -20.0% to 37.2%), and mean vertical relapse rate was 35.4% (range: -25.9% to 162.5%). Reoperation rate was 12.2% (range: 0.0-64.0%). Prospective studies or randomized trials were rare.
CONCLUSION
To obtain a dataset with higher evidence, a prospective multicenter study should be conducted with clearly defined criteria for each complication.
Topics: Cleft Lip; Cleft Palate; Humans; Maxillary Osteotomy; Orthognathic Surgery; Postoperative Complications; Reoperation
PubMed: 26686426
DOI: 10.1016/j.jfma.2015.10.009 -
Head and Neck Pathology Dec 2011Lymphoepithelial carcinoma (LEC) is a rare malignancy. Histologically, it is an undifferentiated carcinoma with an intermixed reactive lymphoplasmacytic infiltrate.... (Review)
Review
Lymphoepithelial carcinoma (LEC) is a rare malignancy. Histologically, it is an undifferentiated carcinoma with an intermixed reactive lymphoplasmacytic infiltrate. Herein, we report two cases of LEC in the head and neck region that presented to Oulu University Hospital. Our first case is a 30-year-old man with LEC in the left maxillary sinus. The second case is a 49-year-old man with LEC in the soft palate and uvula with regional lymph node metastases at diagnosis. In addition, a systematic review of the literature from 1980 to 2010 was performed with MEDLINE and cross-references were searched manually. Case reports and clinical series of oral, oropharyngeal, nasal, and paranasal sinus LECs were reviewed revealing a total of 110 cases. Most of the oral cases were found in the tonsils (n = 29), oropharynx (n = 19), and in oral mucosa (n = 18), while sinonasal cases (n = 40) were mainly in the paranasal sinuses and nasal cavity. From 37 case reports, including ours, the median age was 58 and 62 years for sinonasal and oral/oropharyngeal LECs, respectively. Oral and oropharyngeal LECs have a 70.0% tendency to metastasize and 16.6% spread locally. In contrast, none of the nasal and paranasal LECs metastasized, but 60% spread locally. Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) had been detected in 87.5% of all tested LEC cases. Treatment of LECs, during the last decade, has largely consisted of surgery, combined with radiotherapy or chemoradiation. Although local spread or nodal metastases are fairly common at the time of diagnosis, the mortality rate of adequately treated LEC patients is low.
Topics: Adult; Biopsy; Carcinoma, Squamous Cell; Chemoradiotherapy, Adjuvant; Electrocoagulation; Head and Neck Neoplasms; Humans; Male; Maxillary Sinus; Maxillary Sinus Neoplasms; Middle Aged; Mouth Neoplasms; Palate, Soft; Treatment Outcome; Uvula
PubMed: 21698444
DOI: 10.1007/s12105-011-0278-7 -
Head & Neck May 2020Sinonasal undifferentiated carcinomas (SNUCs), being an aggressive malignancy with dismal survival outcome, have given limited consideration regarding management of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Sinonasal undifferentiated carcinomas (SNUCs), being an aggressive malignancy with dismal survival outcome, have given limited consideration regarding management of regional failures. A total of 12 studies, published between 1999 and 2019, met inclusion criteria. We performed a meta-analysis assessing regional (neck) relapse after elective neck treatment compared to observation in clinically node negative (N0) necks. Clinical data of 255 patients were used for meta-analysis. Among them, 83.4% of patients presented with T4 tumors and 14.1% had positive neck nodes. Elective neck treatment was applied in 49.5% of analyzed patients. Regional relapses occurred in 3.7% of patients who have undergone elective neck treatment compared to 26.4% in patients who had not. Elective neck treatment significantly reduced the risk of regional recurrence (odds ratio 0.20; 95% confidence interval 0.08-0.49; P = .0004). The meta-analysis indicates that elective neck treatment could significantly reduce the risk of regional failures in patients with SNUCs.
Topics: Carcinoma; Carcinoma, Squamous Cell; Elective Surgical Procedures; Humans; Maxillary Sinus Neoplasms; Neck Dissection; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Neoplasm Staging; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 31922316
DOI: 10.1002/hed.26077 -
Head and Neck Pathology Jun 2020Rosai-Dorfman disease (RDD) is a benign, self-limiting histiocytosis of unknown etiology. The classic form of the condition includes a painless cervical lymphaenopathy...
Rosai-Dorfman disease (RDD) is a benign, self-limiting histiocytosis of unknown etiology. The classic form of the condition includes a painless cervical lymphaenopathy accompanied by fever, weight loss and an elevated ESR. Extra nodal RDD (ENRDD) is most frequent in the head and neck. Thirty-eight cases of ENRDD have been described. Seven cases of ENRDD were identified in our pathology biopsy services. The demographic and clinical information was tabulated logically on the basis of age, gender, location and presence or absence of symptoms, treatment and follow-up. Radiographic and histopathological features were also examined. The findings in these cases were correlated with those available from the previously reported cases. Six cases affected women and one case was diagnosed in a male. The age ranged from 22-55 years. Three cases presented as a nasal mass. One of these lesions extended into the paranasal sinuses. One case was located in the maxilla and extended to involve the maxillary sinus. Three cases were diagnosed in the mandible. The maxillary and one mandibular lesion (Case 2) resulted in significant painful irregular bone destruction with a non-healing socket and tooth mobility respectively. One mandibular lesion was asymptomatic (Case 6). The third case affecting the mandible presented as a rapidly expansile mass following a tooth extraction (Case 7). Nasal masses presented with symptoms of obstruction. Nasal masses were excised with no recurrence from up to 2-3 years of follow-up. The mandibular lesions were curetted aggressively. The oral mass in Case 7 was excised synchronously. No recurrence up to 2 years was recorded in Case 2. Follow-up information is not available for Cases 6 and 7. The maxillary lesion was not intervened surgically. The patient has persistent but stable disease for a follow-up period of 2 years. ENRDD is rarely considered in the differential diagnosis in the absence of lymph node involvement. Lesions of ENRDD resemble many other histiocytic and histiocyte-rich lesions of the head and neck. This makes the diagnosis of ENRDD challenging with the potential for under diagnosis or misdiagnosis and delay in treatment.
Topics: Adult; Female; Histiocytosis, Sinus; Humans; Jaw Neoplasms; Male; Middle Aged; Nose Neoplasms; Paranasal Sinus Neoplasms; Young Adult
PubMed: 31368076
DOI: 10.1007/s12105-019-01056-8