Zahedan J Res Med Sci

Image Credit:Zahedan J Res Med Sci

Assessment of Posterior Maxillary Tooth Apices and the Sinus Floor Using Cone-Beam CT in Zahedan

Author(s):
Tahere AliabadiTahere AliabadiTahere Aliabadi ORCID1,*, Mohammad NakhaeeMohammad Nakhaee2
1Department of Endodontics, Dental School, Zahedan University of Medical Sciences, Zahedan ,Iran
2General Dentist, Zahedan, Iran

Zahedan Journal of Research in Medical Sciences:Vol. 28, issue 2; e167730
Published online:Dec 31, 2025
Article type:Research Article
Received:Nov 04, 2025
Accepted:Dec 28, 2025
How to Cite:Aliabadi T, Nakhaee M. Assessment of Posterior Maxillary Tooth Apices and the Sinus Floor Using Cone-Beam CT in Zahedan.Zahedan J Res Med Sci.2025;28(2):e167730.https://doi.org/10.5812/zjrms-167730.

Abstract

Background:

The proximity of the apices of posterior teeth to the maxillary sinus is a major concern for treatments performed in this region. Overextension of root canal fillings beyond the apex, apical surgery, extraction of retained roots, and maxillary sinus surgery in the presence of healthy teeth highlight the importance of understanding the anatomy of this area.

Objectives:

The aim of this descriptive-analytical study was to investigate the relationship between the apices of the maxillary posterior teeth and the floor of the maxillary sinus in the Zahedan population in 2023.

Methods:

In this study, 90 cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) images from patients at Zahedan University of Medical Sciences were examined to assess the position of the apices of the maxillary posterior teeth in relation to the floor of the maxillary sinus. The roots examined included the palatal and buccal roots of premolars, as well as the palatal, distobuccal, and mesiobuccal roots of molars on both the left and right sides, totaling 1,307 roots. Data were collected by direct observation of the images. Statistical analysis was performed using the chi-square test.

Results:

The mean age of the participants was 26.8 ± 7.5 years, ranging from 18 to 46 years. Of the subjects, 14 (15.5%) were male and 76 (84.5%) were female. The results showed that the relationship between the apices of the maxillary posterior teeth and the floor of the maxillary sinus in the second premolars was associated with gender, and with age in both the second molars and second premolars. In addition, the presence or absence of adjacent teeth was significantly related to the proximity of the apices of the maxillary posterior teeth to the maxillary sinus floor.

Conclusions:

 Age and gender play a decisive role in the position of the apices of maxillary posterior teeth in relation to the floor of the maxillary sinus. This relationship also depends on the type of tooth, type of root, and the presence or absence of adjacent teeth. The findings can aid clinicians in planning endodontic treatment, extractions, and implant placement.

1. Background

The maxillary sinus is the first paranasal sinus to develop, and its growth is completed by the eruption of the maxillary third molar around the age of 20 years (1). A computed tomography (CT) study reported that maxillary sinus growth continues into the third decade of life in males and into the second decade in females (2). Although the maxillary sinus is usually bilaterally symmetrical, there are considerable individual differences in its size and shape (3).

The maxillary sinus floor (MSF) is formed by the alveolar processes of the maxilla and is located about 5 mm below the nasal cavity floor at the age of 20 years (4). The posterior maxillary teeth have close anatomical proximity to the MSF, and factors such as ethnicity, sex, age, side, and presence or absence of adjacent teeth may influence the average distance between the root apex and MSF (5). During the normal eruption of molars, the sinus floor moves occlusally and surrounds the root apices of the first premolars to the third molars (PMRs).

Alveolar height, like the distance between MSF and PMRs, decreases with increasing age (6, 7). Due to the anatomical proximity of the posterior maxillary roots to the MSF, dental infection may spread into the maxillary sinus (MS) through periapical tissues, causing odontogenic maxillary sinusitis, which accounts for 10 - 12% of all sinusitis cases (8). The closeness of posterior tooth apices to the maxillary sinus is mainly a concern for treatments in this area. Extrusion of endodontic instruments beyond the apex, apical surgery, extraction of retained roots, and maxillary sinus surgeries in the presence of teeth or dental implants highlight the importance of understanding the anatomy of this region (9).

An oroantral communication (OAC) may occur following extraction or surgical removal of maxillary molars due to the proximity between the roots and the MSF. The most common site of OAC is the maxillary first molar, followed by the second and third molars (10, 11). Other reported complications include: (A) orbital abscess due to odontogenic infection, (B) spread of infection from a periodontal pocket to the adjacent maxillary sinus, and (C) risk of root canal materials entering the sinus cavity (12-16). If clinical errors occur during root canal treatment, shaping instruments, irrigation solutions, and filling materials may be extruded into the maxillary sinus (17). These situations can lead to complications such as odontogenic sinusitis, oroantral syndrome, and traumatic changes, which pose complex problems for dentists (18).

Only a thin mucosal or cortical bone layer exists in the MSF, which increases the risk of oroantral fistula or sinus infection (19, 20). Therefore, the simplest method to assess the relationship between the MSF and PMRs involves appropriate imaging of this area. Periapical and panoramic radiographs are conventional imaging techniques used to plan treatment and evaluate the proximity of roots to the MSF. However, they only provide two-dimensional images, which cause superimposition and magnification of anatomical structures. During periapical surgery, two-dimensional radiographs cannot determine the risk of MSF perforation (21). In general, panoramic radiography is considered an unreliable method for determining the topographic relationship between posterior teeth and the maxillary sinus (22, 23).

The advent of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) has provided accurate three-dimensional imaging of hard tissues at a reasonable cost, revolutionizing imaging of the maxillofacial structures (24). CBCT was introduced in 1998, and its clinical and research applications in dentistry are increasing daily.

Studies using CBCT have shown that the distance between posterior tooth apices and the MSF increases with age, and that premolars in males are generally closer to the sinus compared to females. Several CBCT studies in different populations have examined the influence of age, sex, and adjacent teeth on the relationship between posterior teeth and the sinus floor. Pei et al. reported that the distance between posterior tooth apices and the MSF increases with age, and premolars in males are generally closer to the sinus than in females (25). Estrela et al. found that molar roots are closer to the sinus floor compared to premolars (19). Similar findings regarding age, sex, and root-specific variations were reported by Ragab et al., Ok et al., Tian et al., and Gu et al. (5, 26-31). These studies highlight that anatomical variations differ across populations and emphasize the importance of population-specific data.

The CBCT provides isotropic three-dimensional information with lower dose and cost, and it shows the maxillary sinus and related structures with higher quality compared to CT, with growing accessibility (26). The lack of geometric distortion and prevention of superimposition of adjacent structures are other advantages, making CBCT a precise and non-invasive method for evaluating the relationship between posterior tooth apices and the MSF (24, 27).

2. Objectives

The posterior maxillary teeth, compared to other teeth, exhibit complex anatomical features and a close relationship with the maxillary sinus. Although several studies have investigated these relationships in various populations, limited data are available regarding the Iranian population, particularly in Zahedan. Therefore, the present study aimed to evaluate the spatial relationship between the apices of posterior maxillary teeth and the MSF in the Zahedan population using CBCT. The findings of this study are expected to provide valuable reference data for clinical procedures such as root canal treatment, tooth extraction, dental implant placement, and other interventions in this region.

3. Methods

This descriptive-analytical study was conducted in 2023 at Zahedan University of Medical Sciences, after the research proposal was approved by the Research Council of the Faculty of Dentistry and permission was obtained from the Ethics Committee of Zahedan University of Medical Sciences. Initially, 90 CBCT scan samples of patients from the Radiology Department of the Faculty of Dentistry were selected by a student, and then reconstructed cross-sectional slices, starting from the anterior region and serially, were examined with the assistance of a radiology specialist. The obtained information was recorded in an information form. Finally, the data were coded and entered into SPSS version 19 software.

4. Results

In this study, the relationship between the position of posterior tooth apices and the sinus floor was classified into three categories: Extra-sinus (OS), in contact with the sinus (TS), and intra-sinus (IS).

A total of 90 CBCT images were evaluated in terms of the relationship between the apices of the maxillary molars and the MSF. The mean age of the samples was 26.8 ± 5.7 years, ranging from 18 to 46 years. Regarding age distribution, 60 participants (66.6%) were under 25 years, and 30 participants (33.4%) were over 25 years. In terms of gender distribution, 14 participants (15.5%) were male, and 76 participants (84.5%) were female.

Since in this study the position and relationship between the apices of maxillary molar teeth and the sinus floor were evaluated for the roots of the examined teeth — namely, the first premolar, second premolar, first molar, and second molar — the units of investigation were considered as individual roots: Palatal and buccal roots in premolars, and palatal, distobuccal, and mesiobuccal roots in molars, on both left and right sides, resulting in a total of 1,307 cases.

The first premolar is almost always OS. The second premolar is most often seen in contact with or OS. Molars (first and second) show the greatest variation, with intra-sinus cases more frequently observed in the distobuccal and palatal roots (Table 1).

Table 1.Relationship Between the Roots of Posterior Teeth and the Maxillary Sinus Floor a
Tooth type / RootOSTSIS
First premolar – buccal98.51.50
First premolar – palatal96.33.70
Second premolar48.551.50
First molar – mesio buccal64.735.20
First molar – disto buccal38.644.117.6
First molar – palatal32.645.921.6
Second molar – mesio buccal26.249.124.7
Second molar – disto buccal35.261.43.3
Second molar – palatal41.646.52.6

Abbreviations: OS, extra-sinus; TS, in contact with the sinus; IS, intra-sinus.

a Values are presented as No. (%).

In individuals under 25 years, most roots were extra-sinus, while in those 25 years and older, roots were more frequently in contact with the sinus. In males, the percentage of extra-sinus roots was slightly higher, whereas in females, contact with the sinus was more common (Table 2).

Table 2. Relationship of Posterior Tooth Roots with the Maxillary Sinus by Age and Sex a
GroupsOSTSIS
Under 25 years63.129.27.7
25 years and over44.747.87.5
Male56.836.66.6
Female50.543.75.8

Abbreviations: OS, extra-sinus; TS, in contact with the sinus; IS, intra- sinus.

a Values are presented as No. (%).

5. Discussion

Pei et al., in a study aimed at determining the relationship between the roots of maxillary posterior molars and the sinus floor using CBCT images in a Western Chinese population, reported that the distance between molar apices and the maxillary sinus increases with age, and that premolars in men were closer to the sinus compared to women (25).

In the present study, in 98% of males and 95.8% of females, the buccal root of the first maxillary premolar was of the OS type, while in the palatal root, 97.1% of males and 98% of females also showed OS type. Fisher’s exact test showed no significant difference in the distribution of root apex position of first maxillary premolars in relation to the sinus floor by sex. On the other hand, in the distobuccal root of the first molar, the most common relationship was TS in both males (89.2%) and females (54.4%), and this difference was statistically significant using the chi-square test. In the palatal root, most relationships were TS in females (94.5%) and OS in males (47%). In the mesiobuccal root, most relationships in both men and women were OS type, though the differences were not statistically significant These findings were consistent with the study of Ragab et al. (26), but not with Johari et al. (27). Such discrepancies may be due to differences in population distribution, timing, setting, and sample size.

Estrela et al., in a Brazilian CBCT study, reported that maxillary molar roots are closer to the sinus floor compared to premolars (19). In the present study as well, in the distobuccal, mesiobuccal, and palatal roots of the first molar, most cases under 25 years showed TS type, whereas in those over 25 years, most cases were OS type. This difference was statistically significant, indicating that distribution by age influences the relationship. These results are partially consistent with studies by Ok et al. in Turkey (28) and Pei et al. in China (25).

Among the studied variables were age and sex. According to the results, the pattern of maxillary sinus development differs across ages, sexes, and populations. Langford et al. (29) reported that the extent and nature of sinus growth vary significantly by age. Although the present study included only subjects 18 years and older to exclude changes during sinus development, age still showed an effect on the anatomical variation and positional relationship of molar apices with the sinus floor.

With respect to sex, differences in root apex position were observed. This may be explained by the fact that men generally have longer, more extensive, and fully developed roots, along with larger bone mass and volume, justifying the differences observed here.

Age analysis showed that in some teeth and roots, age influenced the relationship between molar apices and the sinus floor. Previous studies have provided limited data on this correlation. von Arx et al. (30) found no effect of age on MSF relationships, which contrasts with our findings. Conversely, Tian et al. (31) showed that the mean distance between MSF and posterior molar roots decreases with age in a Chinese population. Gu et al. (5) also found that, in all posterior roots, the distance between the apex and MSF increases with age.

Regarding the effect of missing adjacent teeth: For the first premolars, both when no adjacent teeth were missing and when one tooth was missing, most cases were OS type (97.6% and 94.5%, respectively). For the second premolars, when no adjacent teeth were missing, most cases were TS type (56.3%), while when one tooth was missing, most cases were OS type (66.3%). A significant relationship was found between the status of adjacent tooth loss and the type of relationship with the sinus floor for premolars. For first and second molars, in both cases with and without adjacent missing teeth, most relationships were of the TS type (97.6% and 94.5%, respectively). The chi-square test confirmed that adjacent tooth loss significantly influenced the type of relationship in first and second molars across all three roots. This partially agrees with Pei et al. (25), although there are few comparable studies in this regard. Nevertheless, the role of adjacent tooth loss should be considered in diagnosis and treatment planning.

Overall, this study demonstrated that the anatomical variation and position of posterior maxillary tooth apices relative to the sinus floor depend on age, sex, geographic region, and measurement method. In second premolars, the position depended on sex, with TS more common in females and OS more common in males. In first and second molars, the position was more age-dependent, with a tendency toward OS type as age increased. Regarding adjacent tooth loss, in second premolars and molars, missing adjacent teeth shifted the position toward OS type.

5.1. Conclusions

Age and sex play a determining role in the position of maxillary molar apices relative to the maxillary sinus floor. This relationship varies by tooth type, root type, and presence or absence of adjacent teeth. In second molars, OS type was more frequent in males, while in females TS type was more frequent. In individuals under 25 years, most cases were TS, while in those over 25 years, most cases were OS. Similarly, in first molar roots (distobuccal, mesiobuccal, palatal), TS type predominated under 25 years, whereas OS predominated above 25 years. Adjacent tooth loss also influenced the relationship: In first premolars, most cases remained OS regardless of adjacent tooth loss, whereas in second premolars, the pattern shifted from TS to OS with tooth loss. In molars, TS predominated in both cases.

Given this anatomical variability, clinicians in this region should take into account age, sex, tooth type, and root type in diagnostic and interventional procedures.

Footnotes

References

  • 1.
    Scuderi AJ, Harnsberger HR, Boyer RS. Pneumatization of the paranasal sinuses: normal features of importance to the accurate interpretation of CT scans and MR images. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1993;160(5):1101-4. [PubMed ID: 8470585]. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.160.5.8470585.
  • 2.
    Jun BC, Song SW, Park CS, Lee DH, Cho KJ, Cho JH. The analysis of maxillary sinus aeration according to aging process; volume assessment by 3-dimensional reconstruction by high-resolutional CT scanning. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2005;132(3):429-34. [PubMed ID: 15746857]. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otohns.2004.11.012.
  • 3.
    Maspero C, Farronato M, Bellincioni F, Annibale A, Machetti J, Abate A, et al. Three-Dimensional Evaluation of Maxillary Sinus Changes in Growing Subjects: A Retrospective Cross-Sectional Study. Materials. 2020;13(4). [PubMed ID: 32102278]. [PubMed Central ID: PMC7078883]. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma13041007.
  • 4.
    Sharan A, Madjar D. Maxillary sinus pneumatization following extractions: a radiographic study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2008;23(1):48-56. [PubMed ID: 18416412].
  • 5.
    Gu Y, Sun C, Wu D, Zhu Q, Leng D, Zhou Y. Evaluation of the relationship between maxillary posterior teeth and the maxillary sinus floor using cone-beam computed tomography. BMC Oral Health. 2018;18(1):164. [PubMed ID: 30285721]. [PubMed Central ID: PMC6171126]. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-018-0626-z.
  • 6.
    Tsai HH, Tan CT. Positional changes of the upper canine and posterior teeth, hard palate, and sinus floor from primary to permanent dentition. J Dent Child. 2004;71(1):48-53. [PubMed ID: 15272657].
  • 7.
    Valentini P, Abensur DJ. Maxillary sinus grafting with anorganic bovine bone: a clinical report of long-term results. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2003;18(4):556-60. [PubMed ID: 12939008].
  • 8.
    Ariji Y, Obayashi N, Goto M, Izumi M, Naitoh M, Kurita K, et al. Roots of the maxillary first and second molars in horizontal relation to alveolar cortical plates and maxillary sinus: computed tomography assessment for infection spread. Clin Oral Investig. 2006;10(1):35-41. [PubMed ID: 16362431]. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-005-0020-5.
  • 9.
    McCance AM, Moss JP, Fright WR, James DR, Linney AD. A three-dimensional analysis of bone and soft tissue to bone ratio of movements in 17 Skeletal II patients following orthognathic surgery. Eur J Orthod. 1993;15(2):97-106. [PubMed ID: 8500542]. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/15.2.97.
  • 10.
    Punwutikorn J, Waikakul A, Pairuchvej V. Clinically significant oroantral communications--a study of incidence and site. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1994;23(1):19-21. [PubMed ID: 8163853]. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0901-5027(05)80320-0.
  • 11.
    Zia Ur Rahman Q, Rahman AU, Sartaj K, Shuja Riaz A. Frequency and site distribution of oroantral fistula-a study. Pakistan Oral Dent J. 2012;32(1):162-5.
  • 12.
    Hauman CH, Chandler NP, Tong DC. Endodontic implications of the maxillary sinus: a review. Int Endod J. 2002;35(2):127-41. [PubMed ID: 11843967]. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0143-2885.2001.00524.x.
  • 13.
    Huang CH, Brunsvold MA. Maxillary sinusitis and periapical abscess following periodontal therapy: a case report using three-dimensional evaluation. J Periodontol. 2006;77(1):129-34. [PubMed ID: 16579714]. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2006.77.1.129.
  • 14.
    Koch F, Breil P, Marroquin BB, Gawehn J, Kunkel M. Abscess of the orbit arising 48 h after root canal treatment of a maxillary first molar. Int Endod J. 2006;39(8):657-64. [PubMed ID: 16872461]. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2006.01130.x.
  • 15.
    Selden HS. Endo-Antral syndrome and various endodontic complications. J Endod. 1999;25(5):389-93. [PubMed ID: 10530268]. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0099-2399(06)81178-7.
  • 16.
    Vijayan A, Sreejith VP, Surendran R, Ahamed G. Orbital abscess arising from an odontogenic infection. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2012;13(5):740-3. [PubMed ID: 23250186]. https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10024-1220.
  • 17.
    Doud Galli SK, Lebowitz RA, Giacchi RJ, Glickman R, Jacobs JB. Chronic sinusitis complicating sinus lift surgery. Am J Rhinol. 2001;15(3):181-6. [PubMed ID: 11453505]. https://doi.org/10.2500/105065801779954120.
  • 18.
    Watzek G, Bernhart T, Ulm C. Complications of sinus perforations and their management in endodontics. Dent Clin North Am. 1997;41(3):563-83. [PubMed ID: 9248692].
  • 19.
    Estrela C, Nunes CA, Guedes OA, Alencar AH, Estrela CR, Silva RG, et al. Study of Anatomical Relationship between Posterior Teeth and Maxillary Sinus Floor in a Subpopulation of the Brazilian Central Region Using Cone-Beam Computed Tomography - Part 2. Braz Dent J. 2016;27(1):9-15. [PubMed ID: 27007338]. https://doi.org/10.1590/0103-6440201600679.
  • 20.
    Kang SH, Kim BS, Kim Y. Proximity of Posterior Teeth to the Maxillary Sinus and Buccal Bone Thickness: A Biometric Assessment Using Cone-beam Computed Tomography. J Endod. 2015;41(11):1839-46. [PubMed ID: 26411520]. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2015.08.011.
  • 21.
    Oberli K, Bornstein MM, von Arx T. Periapical surgery and the maxillary sinus: radiographic parameters for clinical outcome. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2007;103(6):848-53. [PubMed ID: 17197213]. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tripleo.2006.09.017.
  • 22.
    Nedbalski TR, Laskin DM. Use of panoramic radiography to predict possible maxillary sinus membrane perforation during dental extraction. Quintessence Int. 2008;39(8):661-4. [PubMed ID: 19107252].
  • 23.
    Sharan A, Madjar D. Correlation between maxillary sinus floor topography and related root position of posterior teeth using panoramic and cross-sectional computed tomography imaging. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2006;102(3):375-81. [PubMed ID: 16920546]. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tripleo.2005.09.031.
  • 24.
    Khanna AB. Applications of cone beam computed tomography in endodontics. Evid Base Endodont. 2020;5(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41121-020-00020-4.
  • 25.
    Pei J, Liu J, Chen Y, Liu Y, Liao X, Pan J. Relationship between maxillary posterior molar roots and the maxillary sinus floor: Cone-beam computed tomography analysis of a western Chinese population. J Int Med Res. 2020;48(6):300060520926896. [PubMed ID: 32489120]. [PubMed Central ID: PMC7278324]. https://doi.org/10.1177/0300060520926896.
  • 26.
    Ragab MH, Abdalla AY, Sharaan ME. Location of the Maxillary Posterior Tooth Apices to the Sinus Floor in an Egyptian Subpopulation Using Cone-beam Computed Tomography. Iran Endod J. 2022;17(1):7-12. [PubMed ID: 36703873]. [PubMed Central ID: PMC9868983]. https://doi.org/10.22037/iej.v17i1.34696.
  • 27.
    Johari M, Pachenari F, Amin MR, Sheikhdavoudi N. [Evaluation of the relationship between roots of first and second maxillary molars and floor of maxillary sinus using cone-beam computed tomography]. J Gorgan Univ Med Sci. 2020;22(1):95-100. FA.
  • 28.
    Ok E, Gungor E, Colak M, Altunsoy M, Nur BG, Aglarci OS. Evaluation of the relationship between the maxillary posterior teeth and the sinus floor using cone-beam computed tomography. Surg Radiol Anat. 2014;36(9):907-14. [PubMed ID: 24874032]. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00276-014-1317-3.
  • 29.
    Langford RJ, Natarajan K, Nishikawa H, Dover SM, Hockley AD. Maxillary Volume Growth in Childhood. Plastic Reconstruct Surg. 2003;111(5):1591-7. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.Prs.0000057971.87632.37.
  • 30.
    von Arx T, Fodich I, Bornstein MM. Proximity of premolar roots to maxillary sinus: a radiographic survey using cone-beam computed tomography. J Endod. 2014;40(10):1541-8. [PubMed ID: 25129024]. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2014.06.022.
  • 31.
    Tian XM, Qian L, Xin XZ, Wei B, Gong Y. An Analysis of the Proximity of Maxillary Posterior Teeth to the Maxillary Sinus Using Cone-beam Computed Tomography. J Endod. 2016;42(3):371-7. [PubMed ID: 26711862]. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2015.10.017.

Crossmark
Crossmark
Checking
Share on
Cited by
Metrics

Purchasing Reprints

  • Copyright Clearance Center (CCC) handles bulk orders for article reprints for Brieflands. To place an order for reprints, please click here (   https://www.copyright.com/landing/reprintsinquiryform/ ). Clicking this link will bring you to a CCC request form where you can provide the details of your order. Once complete, please click the ‘Submit Request’ button and CCC’s Reprints Services team will generate a quote for your review.
Search Relations

Author(s):

Related Articles