Assessment of the mandibular incisive canal by panoramic radiograph and cone-beam computed tomography

Yıl 2017, Cilt: 4 Sayı: 1, 17 - 22, 28.04.2017

Dilek Menzġletoğlu

https://doi.org/10.15311/1441.309574

Öz

Background: This study aimed to evaluate the location and characteristics of mental foramen, anterior loop and mandibular incisive canal using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and digital panoramic radiograph (DPR).

Methods: 430 patients both DPRs and CBCTs scans for the location of mental foramen, anterior loop and mandibular incisive canal visibility were included in this retrospective study. All CBCTs were generated with a cone-beam volumetric tomography device.

Results: The mandibular incisive canal (MIC) at least one side in the interforaminal region was detected in 17.7% of panoramic images and 89.1% of CBCT images. There was statistically significant difference between two methods (p=.000) in terms of MICs detection.

Conclusion: When planning a surgical operation between the mental foraminas, possibility of the presence of MIC should be taken into consideration. Besides, DPR is not a reliable technique in detecting MIC. In critical situations, use of CBCT is recommended.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Cone-beam computed tomography, mandible, mandibular nerve

Kaynakça

• 1.Kong N, Hui M, Miao F, Yuan H, Du Y, Chen N. Mandibular incisive canal in Han Chinese using cone beam computed tomography. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2016;45(9):1142-6.
• 2.Raitz R, Shimura E, Chilvarquer I, Fenyo-Pereira M. Assessment of the mandibular incisive canal by panoramic radiograph and cone-beam computed tomography. Int J Dent 2014;2014:187085.
• 3.Abarca M, van Steenberghe D, Malevez C, De Ridder J, Jacobs R. Neurosensory disturbances after immediate loading of implants in the anterior mandible: an initial questionnaire approach followed by a psychophysical assessment. Clin Oral Investig 2006;10:269-77.
• 4.Jacobs R, Mraiwa N, Van Steenberghe D, Sanderink G, Quirynen M. Appearance of the mandibular incisive canal on panoramic radiographs. Surg Radiol Anat 2004;26:329-33.
• 5.Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977;33:159-74.
• 6.Shah N, Bansal N, Logani A. Recent advances in imaging technologies in dentistry. World J Radiol 2014;6:794-807.
• 7.Harorlı A, Akgul M, Dagistan S.Diş Hekimliği Radyolojisi Kitabı; Atatürk Üniversitesi Yayınları; 2006. P.80-150.
• 8.Kumar M, Shanavas M, Sidappa A, Kiran M. Cone beam computed tomography - know its secrets. J Int Oral Health 2015;7:64-8.
• 9.Carrafiello G, Dizonno M, Colli V, Strocchi S, Pozzi Taubert S, et al. Comparative study of jaws with multislice computed tomography and cone-beam computed tomography. Radiol Med 2010;115: 600-11.
• 10.Lee CY, Yanagihara LC, Suzuki JB. Brisk, pulsatile bleeding from the anterior mandibular incisive canal during implant surgery: a case report and use of an active hemostatic matrix to terminate acute bleeding. Implant Dent 2012;21:368-73.