3.8 Review

The Management of Foreign Body Displacement into the Maxillary Sinus as a Complication of Maxillofacial Interventions: Systematic Review

期刊

出版社

SPRINGER INDIA
DOI: 10.1007/s12070-020-02153-9

关键词

Foreign body; Maxillary sinus; Complications; Implants

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Comparing different surgical methods for removing foreign bodies from the maxillary sinus, it was found that functional endoscopic sinus surgery may be a safer and more effective approach, while using replaceable or pedicled bone methods and the Caldwell-Luc approach have higher rates of late complications. Further investigation, especially in prospective, randomized trials, is needed to establish functional endoscopic sinus surgery as the gold standard for retrieving foreign bodies from the maxillary sinus.
Displacement of foreign bodies into the maxillary sinus shows an increasing tendency, especially in regard to raising amount of dental implant installation procedures. The purpose of our study was to compare the efficiency and the rate of late complications among the methods of removal of foreign bodies from maxillary sinus. We performed a systematic review following PRISMA Checklist, searching Pubmed and Google Scholar databases for studies investigating the methods of removal of foreign bodies from maxillary sinus. The inclusion criteria embraced the examined group of at least 10 cases and the follow up period of minimum 3 months. We qualified 7 papers from 531 identified in primary search. Among qualified studies functional endoscopic sinus surgery used in order to remove foreign body from maxillary sinus had no late complications, whereas they occurred in 0-5% cases of using replaceable or pedicled bone approaches and in 15-18% cases of Caldwell-Luc approach. FESS probably should become a gold standard in retrieving foreign bodies from maxillary sinus, however poor evidence requires further investigation, especially in prospective, randomized trials.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据