MyMedR

Displaying all 6 publications

Abstract:

Sort:

Fulltext Cone-beam CT as a diagnostic aid in evaluation of oroantral communication

Donald PM, Nayak V

BMJ Case Rep, 2022 Apr 07;15(4).
PMID: 35393280 DOI: 10.1136/bcr-2022-249127
Matched MeSH terms: Oroantral Fistula*
Fulltext Oro-antral fistulae

Boon LC

Med J Malaysia, 1987 Dec;42(4):323-6.
PMID: 3454408
Matched MeSH terms: Oroantral Fistula/epidemiology*; Oroantral Fistula/pathology
Fulltext Outpatient endoscopic removal of gutta-percha from the maxillary sinus using a sublabial antroscopy: a rare entity

Loh JC, Mansor M, Gendeh BS, Mangat PK

Singapore Dent J, 2010 Jun;31(1):20-5.
PMID: 23739253 DOI: 10.1016/S0377-5291(12)70005-6

Any foreign body in the paranasal sinuses can cause chronic complications. It is therefore important to remove these foreign bodies meticulously. Various approaches are available to accomplish this. This article is a case report of a patient who had gutta-percha as a foreign body in left maxillary sinus, after a gutta-percha point had been used to trace a sinus to confirm that it was an oroantral fistula. Traditional surgical approaches to the maxillary sinus require invasive techniques, such as radical antrostomy and the Caldwell-Luc approach. These may result in further complications and morbidity. The gutta-percha point in this case report was removed endoscopically in an otolaryngology clinic with local anaesthesia using a sublabial antroscopy. There is only one case reported in the dental literature regarding the endoscopically-assisted technique for removal of displaced gutta-percha using the sublabial antroscopy approach (Yura S, Ohga N, Ooi K, Izumiyama Y. Procedure of endoscopic removal of a gutta-percha point in maxillary sinus mucosa by ultrathin arthroscope.
Study site: ENT clinic, Pusat Perubatan Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (PPUKM), Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

Matched MeSH terms: Oroantral Fistula/surgery
Closure of oroantral fistula

Awang MN

Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 1988 Apr;17(2):110-5.
PMID: 3133418

Oroantral fistula is an uncommon complication in oral surgery. Although smaller fistulas of less than 5 mm in diameter may close spontaneously, larger fistulas always require surgical closures. The literature review revealed various procedures for the closure of oroantral fistulas. These procedures may be subdivided into local flap, distant flap and grafting. Procedures involving local flaps are usually adequate to close minor to moderate size defects. Those procedures utilizing the buccal mucoperiosteal flap as the tissue closure include straight-advancement, rotated, sliding and transversal flap procedures; while those involving the palatal mucoperiosteum are straight advancement, rotational-advancement, hinged and island flap procedures. The combinations of various local flaps to strengthen the tissue closure are also being advocated. The advantages and the limitations of these procedures are discussed. Distant flaps and bone grafts are usually indicated in the closure of larger defects in view of their greater tissue bulks. Tongue flaps have superseded extra-oral flaps from extremities and forehead for aesthetic reasons and also in view of their similar tissue replacement. Various tongue flap procedures are described. At present, various alloplastic materials such as gold, tantalum and polymethylmethacrylate are infrequently reported in the closure of oroantral fistulas. However, in the light of successful reports over the use of biological materials, collagen and fibrin, in the closure of oroantral fistulas, there seems to be another simple alternative technique for treating oroantral fistulas.

Matched MeSH terms: Oroantral Fistula/surgery*
Interventions for treating oro-antral communications and fistulae due to dental procedures

Kiran Kumar Krishanappa S, Prashanti E, Sumanth KN, Naresh S, Moe S, Aggarwal H, et al.

Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2016 May 27.
PMID: 27231038 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011784.pub2

BACKGROUND: An oro-antral communication is an unnatural opening between the oral cavity and maxillary sinus. When it fails to close spontaneously, it remains patent and is epithelialized to develop into an oro-antral fistula. Various surgical and non-surgical techniques have been used for treating the condition. Surgical procedures include flaps, grafts and other techniques like re-implantation of third molars. Non-surgical techniques include allogenic materials and xenografts.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness and safety of various interventions for the treatment of oro-antral communications and fistulae due to dental procedures.
SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Oral Health Group's Trials Register (whole database, to 3 July 2015), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library, 2015, Issue 6), MEDLINE via OVID (1946 to 3 July 2015), EMBASE via OVID (1980 to 3 July 2015), US National Institutes of Health Trials Registry (http://clinicaltrials.gov) (whole database, to 3 July 2015) and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (http://www.who.int/ictrp/en/) (whole database, to 3 July 2015). We also searched the reference lists of included and excluded trials for any randomised controlled trials (RCTs).
SELECTION CRITERIA: We included RCTs evaluating any intervention for treating oro-antral communications or oro-antral fistulae due to dental procedures. We excluded quasi-RCTs and cross-over trials. We excluded studies on participants who had oro-antral communications, fistulae or both related to Caldwell-Luc procedure or surgical excision of tumours.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected trials. Two review authors assessed trial risk of bias and extracted data independently. We estimated risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous data, with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We assessed the overall quality of the evidence using the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS: We included only one study in this review, which compared two surgical interventions: pedicled buccal fat pad flap and buccal flap for the treatment of oro-antral communications. The study involved 20 participants. The risk of bias was unclear. The relevant outcome reported in this trial was successful (complete) closure of oro-antral communication.The quality of the evidence for the primary outcome was very low. The study did not find evidence of a difference between interventions for the successful (complete) closure of an oro-antral communication (RR 1.00, 95% Cl 0.83 to 1.20) one month after the surgery. All oro-antral communications in both groups were successfully closed so there were no adverse effects due to treatment failure.We did not find trials evaluating any other intervention for treating oro-antral communications or fistulae due to dental procedures.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found very low quality evidence from a single small study that compared pedicled buccal fat pad and buccal flap. The evidence was insufficient to judge whether there is a difference in the effectiveness of these interventions as all oro-antral communications in the study were successfully closed by one month after surgery. Large, well-conducted RCTs investigating different interventions for the treatment of oro-antral communications and fistulae caused by dental procedures are needed to inform clinical practice.

Matched MeSH terms: Oroantral Fistula/etiology; Oroantral Fistula/surgery*
Fulltext Interventions for treating oro-antral communications and fistulae due to dental procedures

Kiran Kumar Krishanappa S, Eachempati P, Kumbargere Nagraj S, Shetty NY, Moe S, Aggarwal H, et al.

Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2018 08 16;8:CD011784.
PMID: 30113083 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011784.pub3

BACKGROUND: An oro-antral communication is an unnatural opening between the oral cavity and maxillary sinus. When it fails to close spontaneously, it remains patent and is epithelialized to develop into an oro-antral fistula. Various surgical and non-surgical techniques have been used for treating the condition. Surgical procedures include flaps, grafts and other techniques like re-implantation of third molars. Non-surgical techniques include allogenic materials and xenografts. This is an update of a review first published in May 2016.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness and safety of various interventions for the treatment of oro-antral communications and fistulae due to dental procedures.
SEARCH METHODS: Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched the following databases: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register (to 23 May 2018), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library, 2018, Issue 4), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 23 May 2018), and Embase Ovid (1980 to 23 May 2018). The US National Institutes of Health Trials Registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched for ongoing trials. No restrictions were placed on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases. We also searched the reference lists of included and excluded trials for any randomised controlled trials (RCTs).
SELECTION CRITERIA: We included RCTs evaluating any intervention for treating oro-antral communications or oro-antral fistulae due to dental procedures. We excluded quasi-RCTs and cross-over trials. We excluded studies on participants who had oro-antral communications, fistulae or both related to Caldwell-Luc procedure or surgical excision of tumours.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected trials. Two review authors assessed trial risk of bias and extracted data independently. We estimated risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous data, with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We assessed the overall quality of the evidence using the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS: We included only one study in this review, which compared two surgical interventions: pedicled buccal fat pad flap and buccal flap for the treatment of oro-antral communications. The study involved 20 participants. The risk of bias was unclear. The relevant outcome reported in this trial was successful (complete) closure of oro-antral communication.The quality of the evidence for the primary outcome was very low. The study did not find evidence of a difference between interventions for the successful (complete) closure of an oro-antral communication (RR 1.00, 95% Cl 0.83 to 1.20) one month after the surgery. All oro-antral communications in both groups were successfully closed so there were no adverse effects due to treatment failure.We did not find trials evaluating any other intervention for treating oro-antral communications or fistulae due to dental procedures.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found very low quality evidence from a single small study that compared pedicled buccal fat pad and buccal flap. The evidence was insufficient to judge whether there is a difference in the effectiveness of these interventions as all oro-antral communications in the study were successfully closed by one month after surgery. Large, well-conducted RCTs investigating different interventions for the treatment of oro-antral communications and fistulae caused by dental procedures are needed to inform clinical practice.

Matched MeSH terms: Oroantral Fistula/etiology; Oroantral Fistula/surgery*