Effectiveness of Piezoelectric Surgery in Preparing the Lateral Window for Maxillary Sinus Augmentation in Patients with Sinus Anatomical Variations: A Case Series

Purpose: The present article sought to evaluate the effectiveness of a piezoelectric surgical unit for maxillary sinus augmentation surgeries in avoiding perforation of the sinus membrane and other possible procedural complications in patients with anatomical variations of the sinus. Materials and Methods: Twenty-five patients presenting sinus anatomical variations, who were indicated for a total of 40 sinus grafting procedures performed by the lateral window approach with a piezoelectric device, were analyzed. After 6 months of healing, implants were placed. Information collected included clinical and computed tomographic information on anatomical variations in the sinus bone walls, in the size of the sinus, and in the thickness of the sinus membrane. Occurrence of sinus membrane perforation and computed tomographic measurements of the amount of bone height gained with the grafting procedures were also recorded. Results: Only two patients presented a small perforation (less than 5 mm in diameter) of the sinus membrane, which occurred only after osteotomies of the lateral windows and did not compromise the surgical outcome. No implants were lost during a mean follow-up period of 19 months. Conclusion: The use of piezoelectric surgery allowed for the accomplishment of all rehabilitation treatments within the follow-up period of this study. INT J ORAL MAXILLOFAC IMPLANTS 2012;27:1211-1215

Use of a titanium device in lateral sinus floor elevation: an experimental study in monkeys

Aim: To evaluate the effect of a space-maintaining device fixed to the lateral wall of the maxillary sinus after the elevation of the sinus mucosa on bone filling of the sinus cavity. Material and methods: Immediately after the elevation of the maxillary sinus Schneiderian membrane accomplished through lateral antrostomy in four monkeys, a titanium device was affixed to the lateral sinus wall protruding into the sinus cavity to maintain the mucosa elevated without the use of grafting material. The healing of the tissue around the implants was evaluated after 3 and 6 months. Ground sections were prepared and analyzed histologically. Results: The void under the elevated sinus membrane, originally filled with the blood clot, was reduced after 3 as well as after 6 months of healing of about 56% and 40.5%, respectively. In seven out of eight cases, the devices had perforated the sinus mucosa. The formation of mineralized bone and bone marrow amounted to about 42% and 69% after 3 and 6 months, respectively. The connective tissue represented about 53% and 23% of the newly formed tissue after 3 and 6 months, respectively. Conclusions: New bone formation was found below the devices. However, shrinkage of the newly formed tissue was observed both after 3 and 6 months of healing. Hence, the space-maintaining function of the devices used in the present study has to be questioned.

Diagnostic utility of immunohistochemistry in distinguishing trichoepithelioma and basal cell carcinoma: evaluation using tissue microarray samples

Trichoepithelioma is a benign neoplasm that shares both clinical and histological features with basal cell carcinoma. It is important to distinguish these neoplasms because they require different clinical behavior and therapeutic planning. Many studies have addressed the use of immunohistochemistry to improve the differential diagnosis of these tumors. These studies present conflicting results when addressing the same markers, probably owing to the small number of basaloid tumors that comprised their studies, which generally did not exceed 50 cases. We built a tissue microarray with 162 trichoepithelioma and 328 basal cell carcinoma biopsies and tested a panel of immune markers composed of CD34, CD10, epithelial membrane antigen, Bcl-2, cytokeratins 15 and 20 and D2-40. The results were analyzed using multiple linear and logistic regression models. This analysis revealed a model that could differentiate trichoepithelioma from basal cell carcinoma in 36% of the cases. The panel of immunohistochemical markers required to differentiate between these tumors was composed of CD10, cytokeratin 15, cytokeratin 20 and D2-40. The results obtained in this work were generated from a large number of biopsies and resulted in the confirmation of overlapping epithelial and stromal immunohistochemical profiles from these basaloid tumors. The results also corroborate the point of view that trichoepithelioma and basal cell carcinoma tumors represent two different points in the differentiation of a single cell type. Despite the use of panels of immune markers, histopathological criteria associated with clinical data certainly remain the best guideline for the differential diagnosis of trichoepithelioma and basal cell carcinoma. Modern Pathology (2012) 25, 1345-1353; doi: 10.1038/modpathol.2012.96; published online 8 June 2012