Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 21, 2026
A Finite Element Approach for Locating the Center of Resistance of Maxillary Teeth
Published on: April 8, 2020
Multifactorial analysis of the maxillary premolar area for immediate implant placement using cone beam computed
Ahmed Yaseen Alqutaibi1, Aseel Mohammed Aloufi2, Hatem Hazzaa Hamadallah2
1Associate Professor, Substitutive Dental Sciences Department (Prosthodontics), College of Dentistry, Taibah University, Medina, Saudi Arabia; and Associate Professor, Department of Prosthodontics, College of Dentistry, Ibb University, Ibb, Yemen.
Statement Of Problem:
Immediate implant placement in the maxillary premolar area is challenged by anatomic variations imposing risks such as perforation of the buccal bone and the maxillary sinus. Previous studies have addressed the potentially relevant factors individually; a study assessing all relevant variables comprehensively and with a large sample size is lacking.
Purpose:
The purpose of this observational study was to analyze multiple anatomic considerations, including sagittal root position, alveolar bone concavity angle, buccal bone perforation, maxillary sinus floor root proximity, and maxillary sinus perforation in the maxillary premolar area, using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) to inform, perceive, and simplify the placement of immediate implants.
Material And Methods:
The analysis involved 333 CBCT images (189 of men, 144 of women). A total of 1332 first and second maxillary premolars were assessed for sagittal root position, alveolar bone concavity angle, buccal bone perforation, maxillary sinus floor root proximity, and maxillary sinus perforation. Chi-squared and kappa tests were used to analyze the distributions and agreement, respectively, while dependent and independent t tests were used to assess sex and tooth-specific differences. The Spearman correlation test was used to explore the potential correlations (α=.05) RESULTS: The majority of sagittal root position distribution was on the buccal side, ranging from 79.3% to 88.3%, while maxillary sinus floor root proximity showed a predominance of the T0 category (roots separated from the maxillary sinus floor), with noticeable sex disparities in the second right premolar (73% in men versus 50.7% in women; P<.001). The "perforation" category of buccal bone perforation was highest in the right first premolar (54.1%), being higher in women across all teeth. The "perforation" category of maxillary sinus perforation was highest in the left second premolar (21.9%). Associations were found between buccal bone perforation and sagittal root position in the second premolars. The Spearman correlation between root proximity and sinus perforation was high, ranging from 0.68 to 0.78.
Conclusions:
The alveolar bone concavity angle in first premolars, compared with second premolars, poses a higher risk of buccal bone perforation, especially in women. The buccal position is the most common sagittal root position. The risk of sinus perforation is higher in maxillary second premolars, with proximity to or protrusion into the maxillary sinus floor categories strongly correlating with this complication. These findings highlight the importance of thorough assessment and strategic planning to ensure successful immediate implant placement and minimize potential complications.
