3.8 Article

Morphological analysis of the human maxillary sinus using three-dimensional printing

Journal

CONTEMPORARY CLINICAL DENTISTRY
Volume 10, Issue 2, Pages 294-298

Publisher

WOLTERS KLUWER MEDKNOW PUBLICATIONS
DOI: 10.4103/ccd.ccd_548_18

Keywords

Maxillary sinus; sinus morphology; three-dimensional printing

Funding

  1. Direccion de Investigacion Universidad de La Frontera [DI16-0003]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: The maxillary sinus (MS) is described as a pyramid-shaped cavity of the maxilla. Aim: The aim of this research is to present a strategy for morphological analysis of the MS using three-dimensional (3D) printing acquired through cone-beam computed tomography images. Material and Methods: A cross-sectional exploratory, single-blind study was conducted, including 24 subjects. MSs were reconstructed, and 3D virtual modeling was done bilaterally, obtaining 48 physical models generated on a 3D printer. The statistical analysis used tests of normality and tests using a value of P < 0.05 to establish statistical significance. Results: The mean of the MS volume was 15.38 cm(3) (+/- 6.83 cm(3)). The minimum volume was 5.4 cm(3) and the maximum was 30.8 cm(3). In a bilateral comparison of the right and left volume of the same individual, there were no significant differences (P = 0.353). In relation to the morphology of the MSs, the most prevalent was pyramidal with a square base with a prevalence of 66.7%. Related to gender, significant differences were observed only for the left volume (P = 0.009), with the mean volume being significantly greater in the men (19.69 cm(3)) than in the women (12.28 cm(3)). Conclusion: 3D printing of the MS permitted the more precise observation of anatomical features that cannot be seen on a 2D screen. A classification is presented that allows an analysis of sinus morphology, although it is necessary to conduct studies with larger samples to obtain more conclusive results.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available