Published April 7, 2023 | Version v1
Journal article Open

The Investigation of Mandibular Canal Variations in the Turkish Society Comparative with Cone Beam Computerized Tomography and Orthopantomography Methods

Creators

  • 1. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Gülhane Faculty of Dentistry, University of Health Sciences, Ankara, Türkiye.

Description

Özet

Mandibular kanal ve içerdiği nörovasküler yapılar diş hekimliği uygulamalarında önemli oluşumlardır. Komplikasyonsuz ve başarılı cerrahi sonuçlara ulaşmak için mandibular kanalın konumu ve varyasyonlarının doğru ve kesin olarak belirlenmesi son derece önemlidir. Mandibulaya yapılan cerrahi girişimler sırasında inferior alveolar sinir, inferior alveolar arter ve inferior alveolar ven zarar görebilir ve kalıcı parestezi gibi hasarlar oluşabilir. Bu sebeple hastaların sağlıkları ve sosyal yaşamları olumsuz etkilenebilir. Bu çalışmanın amacı, Türk toplumundan alınmış bir hasta grubunda, mandibular kanala ait varyasyonların görülme sıklığını ve özelliklerini, konik ışınlı bilgisayarlı tomografi (KIBT) ve ortopantomografi (OPG) teknikleri ile karşılaştırmalı olarak araştırmaktır. Bu retrospektif çalışma, 2011-2016 yılları arasında kliniğimize başvuran ve mandibular kanal bölgesi net bir şekilde izlenen 20 yaş ve üzeri 700 hastanın KIBT ve OPG görüntüleri kullanılarak gerçekleştirildi. Mandibulayı etkileyen doğumsal ya da kazanılmış deformitesi olan hastalar çalışma dışı bırakıldı. Karşılaştırmalı analizler yapabilmek için her iki görüntüleme yöntemi ile mandibular kanal ve aksesuar mandibular kanalların çap ve uzunluklarını belirlemek amacıyla çeşitli ölçümler yapıldı. Aksesuar mandibular kanalların sayısı, lokalizasyonu ve tipi belirlendi. Çalışmamızda mandibular kanal varyasyon oranları; OPG görüntüleri üzerinde %2.43 (17/700), KIBT görüntüleri üzerinde ise %8.57 (60/700) olarak saptandı. Çalışma sonuçlarımıza göre mandibular kanal varyasyonlarının Türk toplumu için nadir görülen durumlar olmadığı söylenebilir. Riskli girişimler öncesinde ve OPG görüntüleme yönteminin yetersizliği nedeniyle tanıda şüpheye düşüldüğünde; kanama, parestezi ve travmatik nöroma gibi komplikasyonları engellemek için KIBT görüntüleme yöntemine başvurulmalıdır.

Abstract

Mandibular canal and its neurovascular contents are highly important structures for dental clinicals. Accurate localization of the mandibular canal and determination of its variations are crucial aspects to achieve successful surgical results without complications. Inferior alveolar nerve, artery, and vein could be damaged during surgical interventions and serious complications may occur in post-operative period, such as permanent paraesthesia. Thus, the patients' health and social life may be seriously affected. The aim of this study was to investigate the prevalence and features of mandibular canal variations in a group Turkish population using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and orthopantomography (OPG) techniques. This retrospective study was performed on CBCT and OPG images of 700 patients whose mandibular canal area was clearly observed and aged over 20 years old which were referred to our clinic between 2011-2016. Patients with congenital or acquired deformity affecting the mandible were excluded from the study. In order to make comparative analysis, various measurements were made on both types of imaging. In our study, mandibular canal variation rates were identified as 2.43% (17/700) and 8.57% (60/700) on OPG images and CBCT images, respectively. As a result of our study, it could be said that the mandibular canal variations are not rare cases for the Turkish population. Before risky surgical procedures and when there is a suspicious diagnosis due to inadequacy of OPG imaging method; the CBCT imaging method should be referred in order to prevent complications such as hemorrhage, paresthesia, and traumatic neuroma.

Notes

Türk Toplumunda Mandibular Kanal Varyasyonlarının Konik Işınlı Bilgisayarlı Tomografi ve Ortopantomografi Yöntemleri ile Karşılaştırmalı Olarak İncelenmesi

Files

lms.2023.32.pdf

Files (883.9 kB)

Name Size Download all
md5:83c38d898b17641fbcb11c466e7a6da7
883.9 kB Preview Download

Additional details

References

  • 1. Sanchis JM, Peñarrocha M, Soler F. Bifid mandibular canal. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2003; 61(4): 422-4.
  • 2. Rouas P, Nancy J, Bar D. Identification of double mandibular canals: literature review and three case reports with CT scans and cone beam CT. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2007; 36(1): 34-8.
  • 3. Olivier E. The inferior dental canal and its nerve in the adult. Br Dent J 1928; 49(5): 356-8.
  • 4. Auluck A, Pai KM, Mupparapu M. Multiple mandibular nerve canals: radiographic observations and clinical relevance. Report of 6 cases. Quintessence Int 2007; 38(9): 781-7.
  • 5. Rodella LF, Buffoli B, Labanca M, Rezzani R. A review of the mandibular and maxillary nerve supplies and their clinical relevance. Arch Oral Biol 2012; 57(4): 323-34.
  • 6. Güven O, Güneş O. Dental implantolojide nervus alveolaris inferiorun önemi. Türkiye Klinikleri J Dental Sci-Special Topics 2010; 1(1): 16-22.
  • 7. Orhan K, Aksoy S, Bilecenoglu B, Sakul BU, Paksoy CS. Evaluation of bifid mandibular canals with cone-beam computed tomography in a Turkish adult population: a retrospective study. Surg Radiol Anat 2011; 33(6): 501-7.
  • 8. Chaushu S, Chaushu G, Becker A. The use of panoramic radiographs to localize displaced maxillary canines. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 1999; 88(4): 511-6.
  • 9. Ferguson JW, Evans RI, Cheng LH. Diagnostic accuracy and observer performance in the diagnosis of abnormalities in the anterior maxilla: a comparison of panoramic with intraoral radiography. Br Dent J 1992; 173(8): 265-71.
  • 10. Mattick CR, Carter NE, Gordon PH. The diagnostic value of routine intra-oral premaxillary radiographs in orthodontic assessment. Int J Paediatr Dent 1999; 9(3): 161-8.
  • 11. Açıkgöz A. Ortopantomografilerin Klinik Kullanımları. Atatürk Üniv Diş Hek Fak Derg 1996; 6(2): 80-5.
  • 12. Velvart P, Hecker H, Tillinger G. Detection of the apical lesion and the mandibular canal in conventional radiography and computed tomography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2001; 92(6): 682-8.
  • 13. Lurie AG. Panoramic Imaging (Chapter-11). In: White SC, Pharoah MJ (eds), Oral Radiology: Principles and Interpretation (6th edition). 2008, Mosby Elsevier, St. Louis, Missouri. pp:175-190.
  • 14. Tantanapornkul W, Okouchi K, Fujiwara Y, Yamashiro M, Maruoka Y, Ohbayashi N, et al. A comparative study of cone-beam computed tomography and conventional panoramic radiography in assessing the topographic relationship between the mandibular canal and impacted third molars. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2007; 103(2): 253-9.
  • 15. Böhm B, Hirschfelder U. Localization of lower right molars in a panoramic radiograph, lateral cephalogram and dental CT. J Orofac Orthop 2000; 61(4): 237-45.
  • 16. de Melo Albert DG, Gomes AC, do Egito Vasconcelos BC, de Oliveira e Silva ED, Holanda GZ. Comparison of orthopantomographs and conventional tomography images for assessing the relationship between impacted lower third molars and the mandibular canal. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2006; 64(7): 1030-7.
  • 17. Bouquet A, Coudert JL, Bourgeois D, Mazoyer JF, Bossard D. Contributions of reformatted computed tomography and panoramic radiography in the localization of third molars relative to the maxillary sinus. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2004; 98(3): 342-7.
  • 18. Naitoh M, Hiraiwa Y, Aimiya H, Ariji E. Observation of bifid mandibular canal using cone-beam computerized tomography. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2009; 24(1): 155-9.
  • 19. Nortjé CJ, Farman AG, Grotepass FW. Variations in the normal anatomy of the inferior dental (mandibular) canal: a retrospective study of panoramic radiographs from 3612 routine dental patients. Br J Oral Surg 1977; 15(1): 55-63.
  • 20. Gomes AC, Vasconcelos BC, de Oliveira e Silva ED, da Silva LC. Lingual nerve damage after mandibular third molar surgery: a randomized clinical trial. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2005; 63(10): 1443-6.
  • 21. Wadhwani P, Mathur RM, Kohli M, Sahu R. Mandibular canal variant: a case report. J Oral Pathol Med 2008; 37(2): 122-4.
  • 22. Claeys V, Wackens G. Bifid mandibular canal: literature review and case report. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2005; 34(1): 55-8.
  • 23. Lew K, Townsen G. Failure to obtain adequate anaesthesia associated with a bifid mandibular canal: a case report. Aust Dent J 2006; 51(1): 86-90.
  • 24. Afsar A, Haas DA, Rossouw PE, Wood RE. Radiographic localization of mandibular anesthesia landmarks. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 1998; 86(2): 234-41.
  • 25. Kang JH, Lee KS, Oh MG, Choi HY, Lee SR, Oh SH, et al. The incidence and configuration of the bifid mandibular canal in Koreans by using cone-beam computed tomography. Imaging Sci Dent 2014; 44(1): 53-60.
  • 26. Sillanpää M, Vuori V, Lehtinen R. The mylohyoid nerve and mandibular anesthesia. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1988; 17(3): 206-7.
  • 27. Meechan JG. How to overcome failed local anaesthesia. Br Dent J 1999; 186(1): 15-20.
  • 28. Wilson S, Johns P, Fuller PM. The inferior alveolar and mylohyoid nerves: an anatomic study and relationship to local anesthesia of the anterior mandibular teeth. J Am Dent Assoc 1984; 108(3): 350-2.
  • 29. DeSantis JL, Liebow C. Four common mandibular nerve anomalies that lead to local anesthesia failures. J Am Dent Assoc 1996; 127(7): 1081-6.
  • 30. Chávez-Lomeli ME, Mansilla Lory J, Pompa JA, Kjaer I. The human mandibular canal arises from three separate canals innervating different tooth groups. J Dent Res 1996; 75(8): 1540-4.
  • 31. Patterson JE, Funke FW. Bifid inferior alveolar canal. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1973; 36(2): 287-8.
  • 32. Kiersch TA, Jordan JE. Duplication of the mandibular canal. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1973; 35(1): 133-4.
  • 33. Durst JH, Snow JE. Multiple mandibular canals: oddities or fairly common anomalies? Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1980; 49(3): 272-3.
  • 34. Grover PS, Lorton L. Bifid mandibular nerve as a possible cause of inadequate anesthesia in the mandible. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1983; 41(3): 177-9.
  • 35. Zografos J, Kolokoudias M, Papadakis E. Oi typoi tou porou tou kato phatniakou neurou. Melete 700 panoramikon aktinographion [The types of the mandibular canal]. Hell Period Stomat Gnathopathoprosopike Cheir 1990; 5(1): 17-20.
  • 36. Akgünlü F, Kansu Ö. Classification of bifid mandibular canal using panoramic radiographs. Cumhuriyet Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Dergisi 2000; 3: 63-5.
  • 37. Bogdán S, Pataky L, Barabás J, Németh Z, Huszár T, Szabó G. Atypical courses of the mandibular canal: comparative examination of dry mandibles and x-rays. J Craniofac Surg 2006; 17(3): 487-91.
  • 38. Mizbah K, Gerlach N, Maal TJ, Bergé SJ, Meijer GJ. The clinical relevance of bifid and trifid mandibular canals. Oral Maxillofac Surg 2012; 16(1): 147-51.
  • 39. Auluck A, Pai KM, Shetty C. Pseudo bifid mandibular canal. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2005; 34(6): 387-8.
  • 40. Kuribayashi A, Watanabe H, Imaizumi A, Tantanapornkul W, Katakami K, Kurabayashi T. Bifid mandibular canals: cone beam computed tomography evaluation. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2010; 39(4): 235-9.
  • 41. de Oliveira-Santos C, Souza PH, de Azambuja Berti-Couto S, Stinkens L, Moyaert K, Rubira-Bullen IR, et al. Assessment of variations of the mandibular canal through cone beam computed tomography. Clin Oral Investig 2012; 16(2): 387-93.
  • 42. Langlais RP, Broadus R, Glass BJ. Bifid mandibular canals in panoramic radiographs. J Am Dent Assoc 1985; 110(6):923-6.
  • 43. Pires CA, Bissada NF, Becker JJ, Kanawati A, Landers MA. Mandibular incisive canal: cone beam computed tomography. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2012; 14(1): 67-73.
  • 44. Schejtman R, Devoto FC, Arias NH. The origin and distribution of the elements of the human mandibular retromolar canal. Arch Oral Biol 1967; 12(11): 1261-8.
  • 45. Muller H. Caractères non-mètriques du squelette de la tête chéz les populations mediévales de Thoiry (Ain, France) et de Bavois (Vaud, Suisse) Arch Suiss Anthrop Ges 1977; 41(2): 123-64.
  • 46. Bilecenoglu B, Tuncer N. Clinical and anatomical study of retromolar foramen and canal. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2006; 64(10): 1493-7.
  • 47. Narayana K, Nayak UA, Ahmed WN, Bhat JG, Devaiah BA. The retromolar foramen and canal in South Indian dry mandibles. Eur J Anat 2002; 6(3): 141-6.
  • 48. Wyatt WM. Accessory mandibular canal: literature review and presentation of an additional variant. Quintessence Int 1996; 27(2): 111-3.
  • 49. Ghaeminia H, Meijer GJ, Soehardi A, Borstlap WA, Mulder J, Bergé SJ. Position of the impacted third molar in relation to the mandibular canal. Diagnostic accuracy of cone beam computed tomography compared with panoramic radiography. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2009; 38(9): 964-71.