Maxillary Sinusitis as a Complication of Zygomatic Implants Placement: A Narrative Review

Aims: The aim of this review is to consider maxillary sinusitis as a complication of zygomatic implants placements. Maxillary sinusitis a common complication but in the literature there are no reviews that focus only on this condition and its possible treatment. This review was carried out with to highlight the main findings of the literature on this topic and to improve knowledge in this field. Methods: The search strategy resulted in 155 papers. After selection of the inclusion criteria only 11 papers were examined. From the papers these, 12.3% patients presented maxillary sinusitis but only four studies evaluated sinusitis (both clinical and radiological evaluation). The most common treatment used by the authors were antibiotics alone or combined with functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS). Results: The literature shows an absence of precise and shared guidelines diagnosis and post-operative follow-up, and of the treatment of maxillary sinusitis following zygomatic implantology. It has not been determined if the surgical placement of ZIs is better than the other techniques for treatment of the onset of maxillary sinusitis in the post-operative period. Conclusion: To date there are no shared protocols for maxillary sinusitis treatment. In our experience, and according to the literature in the presence of risk factors such as age, comorbidities, smoking, nasal septal deviation or other anatomical variants, we suggested that FESS is performed at the same time as placement of zygomatic implants

A 10-year experience in preoperative ultrasound imaging for parotid glands’ benign neoformations

Salivary gland neoplasms represent less than 4% of all head and neck lesions, being 80% in the parotid gland and usually benign. Imaging plays a key role in the evaluation of parotid gland masses. Ultrasound is cheap, with an excellent resolution and a safe real time assessment making it an ideal first evaluation option. Conversely, MRI is considered a second-line pre-surgery exam used to determine the location, the extension and the signal features of a parotid lesion. Both US and MRI are poorly reliable for predicting histology, therefore a fine-needle aspiration cytology (FNAC) is usually needed. In our retrospective study, we examined 263 patients with parotid diseases and a FNAC positive for a benign neoplasm, who underwent surgery between 2010 and 2020, in the departments of Otorhinolaryngology and Maxillofacial surgery in Verona. We compared a group of 126 patients preoperatively evaluated with ultrasound and a control group of 137 patients studied through third level imaging (usually MRI). In our case series, both third level imaging and US were used in equal measure, despite the lesion size. We found the recurrence rate to be almost the same between the two diagnostic methods and we saw that the patients studied through third level preoperative imaging had a higher complication rate and a worse facial nerve outcome. In our opinion, for patients with a FNAC positive for benign lesion the exclusive use of ultrasound imaging provides enough information to study the neoplasm while allowing for a faster and cheaper preoperative evaluation

A 10-year experience in preoperative ultrasound imaging for parotid glands’ benign neoformations

Salivary gland neoplasms represent less than 4% of all head and neck lesions, being 80% in the parotid gland and usually benign. Imaging plays a key role in the evaluation of parotid gland masses. Ultrasound is cheap, with an excellent resolution and a safe real time assessment making it an ideal first evaluation option. Conversely, MRI is considered a second-line pre-surgery exam used to determine the location, the extension and the signal features of a parotid lesion. Both US and MRI are poorly reliable for predicting histology, therefore a fine-needle aspiration cytology (FNAC) is usually needed. In our retrospective study, we examined 263 patients with parotid diseases and a FNAC positive for a benign neoplasm, who underwent surgery between 2010 and 2020, in the departments of Otorhinolaryngology and Maxillofacial surgery in Verona. We compared a group of 126 patients preoperatively evaluated with ultrasound and a control group of 137 patients studied through third level imaging (usually MRI). In our case series, both third level imaging and US were used in equal measure, despite the lesion size. We found the recurrence rate to be almost the same between the two diagnostic methods and we saw that the patients studied through third level preoperative imaging had a higher complication rate and a worse facial nerve outcome. In our opinion, for patients with a FNAC positive for benign lesion the exclusive use of ultrasound imaging provides enough information to study the neoplasm while allowing for a faster and cheaper preoperative evaluation