Volume 7, Issue 3 (9-2019)
Jorjani Biomed J 2019, 7(3): 56-67 |
Back to browse issues page
Seyed Hossein Razavi1 
, Soudeh Berahmand 2, Khalil Sarikhani Khorami1 , Motahareh Kaboodsaz Yazdi1 , Nasim Namiranian3
, Soudeh Berahmand 2, Khalil Sarikhani Khorami1 , Motahareh Kaboodsaz Yazdi1 , Nasim Namiranian3
1- Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, School of Dentistry, Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences, Yazd, Iran
2- School of Dentistry, Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences, Yazd, Iran , soudeh.b92@gmail.com
3- Yazd Diabetes Research Center, Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences, Yazd, Iran
2- School of Dentistry, Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences, Yazd, Iran , soudeh.b92@gmail.com
3- Yazd Diabetes Research Center, Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences, Yazd, Iran
Abstract: (5023 Views)
Background and objectives: An effective factor in choosing the correct place for the dental implant and performing surgical procedures in the posterior regions of mandible is the position of the mandibular canal. Failure to consider this important landmark will damage the inferior alveolar nerve. Considering the widespread use of implants and the precision of the images obtained from CBCT. The aim of this study was to evaluate the rate of visibility of mandibular canal by CBCT in order to prevent damage to the inferior alveolar nerves and arteries.
Material And Methods: In this study, 90 archived CBCT images of patients from a private center of oral and maxillofacial radiology in Yazd that was taken by technician was evaluated during 2012-2019. The visibility of the mandibular canal in reconstructed panoramic images of CBCT was assessed by a dentistry student trained by the maxillofacial radiologist in five areas in different thicknesses on each side. Data were analyzed using SPSS 17 software. Chi-square, and correlation coefficient were done.
Results: In total, in 53.38% of CBCT images both borders of mandibular canal were visible, in 17.95%, only one border was visible (difficult observation) and in 28.7% of cases, lack of visibility of mandibular canal was reported. There was no significant difference between sex, age, side and thickness in mandibular canal visibility (P >0.05).
Conclusion: In more than half of CBCT images, both borders were clearly visible in both right and left sides; therefore we can conclude that CBCT is a useful tool for the observation of mandibular canal before surgeries.
Material And Methods: In this study, 90 archived CBCT images of patients from a private center of oral and maxillofacial radiology in Yazd that was taken by technician was evaluated during 2012-2019. The visibility of the mandibular canal in reconstructed panoramic images of CBCT was assessed by a dentistry student trained by the maxillofacial radiologist in five areas in different thicknesses on each side. Data were analyzed using SPSS 17 software. Chi-square, and correlation coefficient were done.
Results: In total, in 53.38% of CBCT images both borders of mandibular canal were visible, in 17.95%, only one border was visible (difficult observation) and in 28.7% of cases, lack of visibility of mandibular canal was reported. There was no significant difference between sex, age, side and thickness in mandibular canal visibility (P >0.05).
Conclusion: In more than half of CBCT images, both borders were clearly visible in both right and left sides; therefore we can conclude that CBCT is a useful tool for the observation of mandibular canal before surgeries.
Type of Article: Original article |
Subject:
General medicine
Received: 2019/04/2 | Accepted: 2019/08/2 | Published: 2019/09/1
Received: 2019/04/2 | Accepted: 2019/08/2 | Published: 2019/09/1
References
1. Pria CM, Masood F, Beckerley JM, Carson RE. Study of the inferior alveolar canal and mental foramen on digital panoramic images. The journal of contemporary dental practice. 2011;12(4):265-71. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
2. Angel JS, Mincer HH, Chaudhry J, Scarbecz M. Cone-beam computed tomography for analyzing variations in inferior alveolar canal location in adults in relation to age and sex. Journal of forensic sciences. 2011;56(1):216-9. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
3. Levine MH, Goddard AL, Dodson TB. Inferior alveolar nerve canal position: a clinical and radiographic study. Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery : official journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons. 2007;65(3):470-4. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
4. Oliveira-Santos C, Capelozza AL, Dezzoti MS, Fischer CM, Poleti ML, Rubira-Bullen IR. Visibility of the mandibular canal on CBCT cross-sectional images. Journal of applied oral science : revista FOB. 2011;19(3):240-3. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
5. Weckx A, Agbaje JO, Sun Y, Jacobs R, Politis C. Visualization techniques of the inferior alveolar nerve (IAN): a narrative review. Surgical and radiologic anatomy : SRA. 2016;38(1):55-63. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
6. Garay I, Netto HD, Olate S. Soft tissue calcified in mandibular angle area observed by means of panoramic radiography. International journal of clinical and experimental medicine. 2014;7(1):51-6. [Google Scholar]
7. Schulze K.W.R MM, Schwanecke U . Automated detection of patient movement during a CBCT scan based on the projection data. Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology and Oral Radiology. 2015;119(4):468-72. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
8. Venkatesh E, Elluru S.V. Cone beam computed tomography: basics and applications in dentistry. Journal of Istanbul University Faculty of Dentistry. 2017;51(3 Suppl 1):S102-s121. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
9. Ghaeminia H, Meijer GJ, Soehardi A, Borstlap WA, Mulder J, Berge SJ. Position of the impacted third molar in relation to the mandibular canal. Diagnostic accuracy of cone beam computed tomography compared with panoramic radiography. International journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery. 2009;38(9):964-71. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
10. Hu KS, Choi DY, Lee WJ, Kim HJ, Jung UW, Kim S. Reliability of two different presurgical preparation methods for implant dentistry based on panoramic radiography and cone-beam computed tomography in cadavers. Journal of periodontal & implant science. 2012;42(2):39-44. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
11. do Carmo Oliveira M, Tedesco, T.K., Gimenez, T. et al. Analysis of the frequency of visualization of morphological variations in anatomical bone features in the mandibular interforaminal region through cone-beam computed tomography. Surgical and radiologic anatomy : SRA. 2018;40:1119-31. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
12. Miles MS, Parks ET, Eckert GJ, Blanchard SB. Comparative evaluation of mandibular canal visibility on cross-sectional cone-beam CT images: a retrospective study. Dento maxillo facial radiology. 2016;45(2):20150296. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
13. Shokri A, Shakibaei Z, Langaroodi AJ, Safaei M. Evaluation of the mandibular canal visibility on cone-beam computed tomography images of the mandible. The Journal of craniofacial surgery. 2014;25(3):e273-7. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
14. Jung YH, Cho BH. Radiographic evaluation of the course and visibility of the mandibular canal. Imaging science in dentistry. 2014;44(4):273-8. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
15. Singh N, Jaju P, Jaju S, Agarwal R. Detection of anatomical variations in mandible by panoramic radiography. Journal of Cranio-Maxillary Diseases. 2014;3(2):95. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
16. Pour DG, Arzi B, Shamshiri AR. Assessment of slice thickness effect on visibility of inferior alveolar canal in cone beam computed tomography images. Dental research journal. 2016;13(6):527-31. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
17. Angelopoulos C, Thomas SL, Hechler S, Parissis N, Hlavacek M. Comparison between digital panoramic radiography and cone-beam computed tomography for the identification of the mandibular canal as part of presurgical dental implant assessment. Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery : official journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons. 2008;66(10):2130-5. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
18. Suomalainen A, Venta I, Mattila M, Turtola L, Vehmas T, Peltola JS. Reliability of CBCT and other radiographic methods in preoperative evaluation of lower third molars. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2010;109(2):276-84. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |