Home > Riviste > Minerva Stomatologica > Fascicoli precedenti > Articles online first > Minerva Stomatologica 2020 Jul 21

ULTIMO FASCICOLO
 

JOURNAL TOOLS

eTOC
Per abbonarsi
Sottometti un articolo
Segnala alla tua biblioteca
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Publication history
Estratti
Permessi
Per citare questo articolo

 

 

Minerva Stomatologica 2020 Jul 21

DOI: 10.23736/S0026-4970.20.04374-5

Copyright © 2020 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

lingua: Inglese

Assessment of the configuration of the mandibular canal using cone beam computed tomography

Ana P. MANFRON 1, Alessandra DITZEL 1, Sérgio IGNÁCIO 1, Flávia FONTÃO 2, Luciana R. ALANIS 1

1 School of Life Sciences, Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Paraná (PUCPR), Curitiba, Brazil; 2 Latin American Institute of Dental Research and Education (ILAPEO), Curitiba, Brazil


PDF


BACKGROUND: During dental implants placement and bone augmentation procedures, it is important to determine the presence and location of mandibular canal anatomical variation in order to avoid injuries to inferior alveolar bundle. This study aimed to describe the prevalence and configuration of mandibular canal branching in the posterior region of the mandible using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT).
METHODS: The interpretation of the images was conducted according to the presence, classification, and location of the mandibular canal. Horizontal and vertical distances from mandibular canal in the ramus region to the molar region was recorded. CBCT images of 751 patients, 486 (64.7%) women and 265 (35.3%) men, with a mean age of 54.57 (±13.23;14-93) years, were interpreted by one calibrated examiner.
RESULTS: Out of 1,502 hemi-mandibles images, mandibular canal variations were observed in 130 (8.6%). 64 (49.2%) mandibular canal variations were identified on the right side and 66 (50.8%) on the left side. The mean distances between superior cortical of the mandibular canal and the base of mandible, buccal cortical of mandibular canal and buccal cortical bone, and superior cortical of mandibular canal and alveolar ridge were 12.16mm (±2.68), 4.17mm (±1.30), and 12.97mm (±4.01), respectively. Type I mandibular canal variation was the most frequent (68;52.2%), followed by type III (34;26.1%).
CONCLUSIONS: Prevalence of mandibular canal variations was 8.6%, type I was the most common and its direction showed proximity with lingual surface in the second molar region.


KEY WORDS: Anatomic variation; Mandible; Cone-beam computed tomography

inizio pagina