## 3 Results  
Among the 150 CBCT scans sampled, 77 scans containing at least one MS were included in the study population The medical history of all the included patients was non-contributory. These involved a total of 275 teeth from individuals with a mean age of 45.9 \(\pm\) 29 years. The study included 115 teeth from males (58%) and 160 teeth from females (42%) (Table 1).  
No correlation was found between sex, age, and MS mucosal thickening. Seventy-seven teeth (28%) presented with mucosal thickening >2 mm (class 3 or higher). The prevalence of MT >2 mm was almost homogenous amongst males (40/77--51.9%) and females (37/77--48.1%). The overall gender related difference in MT was not significant (\(p\) > 0.05).  
Among the teeth presenting with an MT score of three or more: 3 were canines, 13 were first premolars, 11 were second premolars, 28 were first molars, 20 were second molars, and 1 was a third molar (Table 2).  
A non-intact CBCT PAI (over 0.5 mm, score 1 or more) was found in 189/275 teeth (68.7%), of which, 68 teeth also presented with MT (68/189--32.8%, \(p\) > 0.05).  
A total of 67/275 (24.3%) teeth presented with apical periodontitis (CBCT PAI score 3 or more).  
Out of 77 cases of mucosal thickening, 44 (57.1%) cases were associated with periapical lesions (CBCT PAI 3 or more, Table 3, \(p\) < 0.05).  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Sex**} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Age (years)**} \\ \cline{2-5}  & **18–30** & **31–50** & **>51** & **Total** \\ \hline Male & 28/275 (10.1\%) & 16/275 (5.8\%) & 72/275 (26.1\%) & 42\% \\ Female & 38/275 (13.8\%) & 73/275 (26.5\%) & 48/275 (17.7\%) & 58\% \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 1: Study Demographics.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multicolumn{1}{c}{} & \multicolumn{5}{c}{**Mucosal Thickening**} \\ \hline
**Tooth Type:** & **Percent of Total** & **0** & **1** & **2** & **3** & **4** \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{Canine} & 19.7\% & 44/275 & 3/275 & 4/275 & 2/275 & 1/275 \\  & & (16\%) & (1.1\%) & (1.5\%) & (0.7\%) & (0.4\%) \\
1 st premolar & 23.6\% & 28/275 & 14/274 & 10/275 & 3/275 & 10/275 \\  & & (10.2\%) & (5.1\%) & (3.6\%) & (1.1\%) & (3.6\%) \\
2 nd premolar & 16\% & 5/275 & 14/274 & 14/274 & 4/275 & 7/275 \\  & & (1.8\%) & (5.1\%) & (5.1\%) & (1.5\%) & (2.5\%) \\
1 st molar & 18.9\% & 5/275 & 10/275 & 9/275 & 14/274 & 14/274 \\  & & (1.8\%) & (3.6\%) & (3.3\%) & (5.1\%) & (5.1\%) \\
2 nd molar & 18\% & 5/275 & 9/275 & 16/275 & 10/275 & 10/275 \\  & & (1.8\%) & (3.3\%) & (5.7\%) & (3.6\%) & (3.6\%) \\
3 rd molar & 3.8\% & 4/275 & 4/275 & 1/275 & 1/275 & 0/275 \\  & & (1.5\%) & (1.5\%) & (0.4\%) & (0.4\%) & (0.4\%) \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 2: Tooth type and the relationship with mucosal thickness.  
The size of the lesion was the only parameter that was found to be significantly connected to the presence of mucosal thickness (Table 3, \(p\) < 0.05).  
There was no correlation between the position of the root tip and the sinus floor. In the majority of the teeth examined, the root extended below/outside the sinus floor, OS-60.5%. Only 7.4% of all teeth presented with the tip of the root inside the MS (Table 4).