Assessment of the Inferior Mandibular Canal’s Position by Cone-Beam Computed Tomography
Journal of Dental School,
Vol. 34 No. 1 (2016),
27 February 2016
,
Page 1-8
https://doi.org/10.22037/jds.v34i1.24680
Abstract
Objectives: It is important to know the exact location and anatomic variety of inferior alveolar nerve canal for different procedures of mandibular surgeries. The aim of the present study was to evaluate inferior mandibular canal’s anatomic position by Cone-beam Computed Tomography (CBCT).
Methods: In a cross sectional study, CBCT were taken and assessed from 130 patients (260 semi-arch) referring to the radiologic department of Shahid Beheshti Dental Faculty. Three points including 1cm before mental foramen (point A), under second molar’s furcation (point B) and 1cm after mandibular foramen on the inferior alveolar canal (point C) were chosen. The canal diameter, length and the distance between the canal and inferior border of mandible were measured. SPSS version 19 software used for data analysis. T and variance tests evaluated the role of age, gender, canal length and jaw side.
Results: Mean age of patients was 43.73±13.25. Canal length, 61.71 ± 4.95 ml and canal diameter was 2.94 ± 0.58 mm. The distance between the canal and the inferior border of mandible was 9.47 ± 2.23 mm. There was a significant difference in gender and age for all parameters. The distance between the canal and the inferior border in C point and at mental foramen in cases with short and long canal length showed a significant difference. (p≤0.012)
None of the variables showed significant difference between right and left sides.
Conclusion: The anatomic position of mandibular canal is related to gender and canal length, and independent to age and side.
- Mandibular canal
- Anatomic position
- CBCT (Cone-beam Computed Tomography)
How to Cite
References
Mraiwa N, Jacobs R, van Steenberghe D, Quirynen M. Clinical assessment and surgical implications of anatomic challenges in the anterior mandible. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2003;5(4):219-25.
Kumar V, Ludlow J, Soares Cevidanes LH, Mol A. In vivo comparison of conventional and cone beam CT synthesized cephalograms. Angle Orthod. 2008 Sep;78(5):873-9.
Angel JS, Mincer HH, Chaudhry J, Scarbecz M. Cone-beam Computed tomography for analyzing variations in inferior alveolar canal Iocation in adults in relation to age and sex. J Forensic Sci. 2011 Jan;56(1):216-9.
Zografos J, Kolokoudias M, Papadakis E. [The types of the mandibular canal]. Hell Period Stomat Gnathopathoprosopike Cheir. 1990 Mar;5(1):17-20.
Gomes AC, Vasconcelos BC, Silva ED, Caldas Ade F Jr, Pita Neto IC. Sensitivity and specificity of Pantomography to predict inferior alveolar nerve damage during extraction of impacted lower third molars. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2008 Feb;66(2):256-9.
Akgul AA, Toygar TU. Natural craniofacial changes in the third decade of life: a longitudinal study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2002 Nov;122(5):512-22.
Kamburoglu K, Kilic C, Ozen T, Yuksel SP. Measurements of mandibular canal region obtained by cone-beam computed tomography: a cadaveric study. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2009 Feb;107(2):e34-42.
Kim ST, Hu KS, Song WC, Kang MK, Park HD, Kim HJ. Location of the mandibular canal and the topography of neurovascular structures. J Craniofac Surg. 2009 May;20(3):936-9.
Haghani J, Torabi M, Mehdizadeh M. Evaluation of the morphology and anatomy of mandibular canal in panoramic radiography of patient over 25 years old. J Dent Sch. 2009; 27(3): 128-35.
Parikh SN. Bone graft substitutes: past, present, future. J Postgrad Med. 2002 Apr-Jun;48(2):142-8.
Silva FM, Cortez AL, Moreira RW, Mazzonetto R. Complications of intraoral donor site for bone grafting prior to implant placement. Implant Dent. 2006 Dec;15(4):420-6.
Obradovic O, Todorovic L, Pesic V, Pejkovic B, Vitanovic V. Morphometric analysis of mandibular canal: Clinical aspects. Bull Group Int Rech Sci Stomatol Odontol. 1993 Jul-Sep;36(3-4):109-13.
Rashid SA, Jamal Ali. Morphometric analysis of mandibular canal course and position in relation to gender and age of Iraqi sample using digital panoramic imaging. J Bagh Coll Dent. 2011; 23: 92-99.
Amorim MM, Borini CB, Haiter-Neto F, Caria PHF. Morphological description of mandibular canal in panoramic radiographs of Brazilian subjects: Association between anatomic characteristic and clinical procedures. Int J Morphol 2009; 27(4): 1243–3248.
Ikeda K, Ho KC, Nowicki BH, Haughton VM. Multiplanar MR and anatomic study of the mandibular canal. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 1996 Mar;17(3):579-84.
Von Arx T, Matter D, Buser D, Bornstein MM. Evaluation of location and dimensions of lingual foramina using limited cone-beam computed tomography. J Oral Maxill of ac Surg. 2011 Nov;69(11):2777-85.
Levine MH, Goddard AL, Doson TB.Inferior alveolar nerve canal position: a clinical and radiographic study.J Oral Maxill of ac Surg. 2007 Mar;65(3):470-4.
de Oliveira-Santos C, Souza PH, de AzambujaBerti-CoutoS, Stinkens L, Moyaert K, Rubira-Bullen IR, et al. Assessment of variations of the mandibular canal through cone beam computedtomography. Clin Oral Investig. 2012 Apr;16(2):387-93.
- Abstract Viewed: 186 times
- PDF Downloaded: 168 times