Background: Odontogenic sinusitis is a relevant infectious condition of the paranasal sinuses. The widespread use of dental implants and reconstructive procedures for dental implant placement has led to new types of complication. To the authors’ knowledge, no publication has extensively examined sinonasal complications resulting from dental treatment, and no classification system allowing standardization and comparison of results is currently available. This study was designed to (a) analyze the results obtained from surgical treatment of complications resulting from dental procedures combining functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS) and an intraoral approach and (b) propose a new classification system and standardized treatment protocols for sinonasal complications resulting from dental procedures. Methods: A total of 257 patients consecutively treated with FESS (136 in conjunction with oral surgery) were included in the study. Different clinical situations were integrated into a new classification system based on the pathogenesis and clinical aspects of each case, with the aim of identifying homogenous treatment groups. Results were evaluated for each class. Results: Of the 257 patients, 254 were successfully treated with surgery performed according to the proposed protocols. Three of 257 patients required a second surgery, after which they completely recovered. Complications of implant and preimplant surgery (maxillary sinus floor elevation) showed longer recovery times. Conclusion: The results obtained are very encouraging. The majority of patients (254/257; 98.8%) were successfully treated with the proposed protocols. These results seem to indicate that the rationalization of surgical treatment protocols according to the initial clinical situation may significantly improve the clinical outcome.

Purpose Odontogenic sinusitis and sinonasal complications of dental disease or treatment (SCDDT) represent a heterogeneous group of conditions that often require multidisciplinary care. The present study aims to prospectively validate a classification and treatment protocol for SCDDT patients. Methods One hundred twenty-eight consecutive patients (73 females and 45 males, mean age 52.4 years) affected by SCDDT not responding to dental and medical therapy were classified and surgically treated according to the proposed protocol. The protocol classified patients into three aetiology-based groups (preimplantologic, implantologic, and related to traditional dental diseases and procedures, respectively). The groups were further divided into classes according to the presence of oro-antral communications and/or dislocated dental hardware. Each condition was treated according to the class-related, protocol-defined treatment, by either a transnasal or combined transnasal/transoral approach. All patients were successfully classified according to our protocol. None of the proposed classes were redundant, and no condition fell outside the definitions. Results The surgical treatment protocol proved to be adequate and effective, in that 125 of the 128 patients completely recovered after surgical treatment. Conclusions The term SCDDT and the consequent classification proposed by the authors appear, therefore, to be nosologically correct. Furthermore, the protocol-related proposed treatment appears to be clinically sound, with a success rate nearing 98%.

Background: Odontogenic sinusitis affects a significant proportion of patients with paranasal sinus infections. Nevertheless, no shared diagnostic criteria for this condition have yet been implemented and published studies differ in their definition of the disease. Objective: The present systematic review of the literature was undertaken to characterize and analyze the different diagnostic criteria currently employed for odontogenic sinusitis. Methods: Systematic searches for studies published between 2009 and 2019 were performed in Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases. Search criteria were designed to identify all studies focusing, even partially, on odontogenic sinusitis. Human original studies except single case reports published in the English, French, German, Spanish, or Italian language were included. We removed duplicate abstracts and conducted full-text reads, data extraction, and quality assessment procedures (using the Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine levels of evidence and National Heart Lung and Blood Institute Study Quality Assessment Tools). We reviewed articles for diagnostic criteria, both in terms of definition and etiology identification. Results: Among 1,000 unique citations, 63 studies were deemed eligible. Most articles (n = 45) were retrospective case series; a single randomized clinical trial was available. Only 49 studies reported diagnostic criteria, yet relied marginally on published guidelines (n = 10 articles) for identifying sinusitis, often choosing instead to develop their own clinical (n = 15 articles), endoscopic (n = 12 articles), and/or radiologic (n = 30 articles) criteria. For odontogenic focus identification, 14 papers required a multidisciplinary evaluation, 11 papers required a time relationship between dental procedures and sinusitis, 24 papers required oroscopy and/or dental evaluation, and 53 papers required computed tomography. Conclusions: Current diagnostic criteria for odontogenic sinusitis are extremely heterogeneous. Establishing shared diagnostic criteria aimed at defining both sinusitis and related odontogenic foci would spur collaboration between investigators and support more comprehensive outcomes evaluations together with a better understanding of treatment options.