CBCT ile Nasopalatine Kanalın Morfolojik ve Morfometrik Analizi: Yaş, Cinsiyet ve Dental Durumun Etkisi

Öz

Amaç: Nazopalatin kanal (NPK), anterior maksillada yer alan ve morfolojik ile boyutsal varyasyonlar gösteren önemli bir anatomik yapıdır. Bu varyasyonlar, dental implant yerleştirme ve cerrahi planlamayı etkileyebilir. Bu çalışmanın amacı, NPK’nın konik ışınlı bilgisayarlı tomografi (KIBT) ile morfoloji ve boyutlarını değerlendirmek ve bu özelliklerin cinsiyet, yaş ve anterior diş varlığı ile ilişkisini incelemektir. Gereç ve Yöntem: Toplam 1023 hastanın KIBT görüntüleri retrospektif olarak analiz edildi. NPK morfolojisi üç tipe ayrıldı: tek kanal, paralel kanallar ve Y şeklinde kanal. NPK’nın genişliği ve uzunluğu ölçüldü. İstatistiksel analizlerde ki-kare, Kruskal-Wallis ve Mann-Whitney U testleri kullanıldı. Yaş ile NPK boyutları arasındaki ilişki Spearman korelasyon katsayısı ile değerlendirildi. Bulgular: NPK morfolojisi cinsiyete göre istatistiksel olarak anlamlı farklılık gösterdi (p = 0.047). Y şeklindeki kanal erkeklerde daha sık görülürken, tek kanal tipi kadınlarda daha yaygın bulundu. NPK uzunluğu erkeklerde (p < 0.001) ve anterior dişlere sahip bireylerde (p < 0.001) anlamlı derecede daha fazlaydı. Ancak, NPK genişliği ile anterior diş varlığı arasında anlamlı bir fark saptanmadı (p > 0.05). Sonuç: Bu çalışma, NPK’nın anatomik varyasyonlarını ve klinik önemini vurgulamaktadır. Cerrahi işlemler öncesinde KIBT değerlendirmesi, daha güvenli ve hassas planlama açısından kritik öneme sahiptir. Cinsiyet ve dental durum, anterior maksillada implant planlaması sırasında mutlaka göz önünde bulundurulmalıdır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Anatomik varyasyonlar
• implant cerrahisi
• konik ışınlı bilgisayarlı tomografi
• maksiller morfoloji
• nazopalatin kanal

Morphological and Morphometric Analysis of the Nasopalatine Canal Using CBCT: Influence of Age, Sex, and Dental Status

Öz

Objective: The nasopalatine canal (NPC) is a crucial anatomical structure located in the anterior maxilla, exhibiting morphological and dimensional variations. These variations may influence dental implant placement and surgical planning. This study aims to evaluate the morphology and dimensions of the NPC using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and to analyze its relationship with gender, age, and the presence of anterior teeth. Methods: A total of 1023 patients’ CBCT scans were retrospectively analyzed. NPC morphology was categorized into three types: single canal, parallel canals, and Y-shaped canal. The width and length of the NPC were measured. Chi-square, Kruskal-Wallis, and Mann-Whitney U tests were used for statistical analyses. The relationship between age and NPC dimensions was evaluated using Spearman’s correlation coefficient. Results: NPC morphology showed a statistically significant difference according to gender (p = 0.047). The Y-shaped canal was more prevalent in males, while the single canal type was more frequently observed in females. NPC length was significantly greater in males (p < 0.001) and in patients with anterior teeth (p < 0.001). However, no significant difference was found between NPC width and the presence of anterior teeth (p > 0.05). Conclusion: This study highlights the anatomical variations and clinical significance of the NPC. Preoperative CBCT evaluation is essential for safer and more precise surgical procedures. Gender and dental status should be taken into consideration during implant planning in the anterior maxilla.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Anatomical variations
• cone-beam computed tomography
• implant surgery
• maxillary morphology
• nasopalatine canal

Kaynakça

1. 1. Jacobs R, Lambrichts I, Liang X, Martens W, Mraiwa N, Adriaensens P, et al. Neurovascularization of the anterior jawbones revisited using high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2007;103(5):683-93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tripleo.2006.11.014
2. 2. Bornstein MM, Balsiger R, Sendi P, Von Arx T. Morphology of the nasopalatine canal and dental implant surgery: a radiographic analysis of 100 consecutive patients using limited cone-beam computed tomography. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2011;22(3):295-301. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.02010.x
3. 3. Liang X, Jacobs R, Martens W, Hu Y, Adriaensens P, Quirynen M, et al. Macro- and micro-anatomical, histological and computed tomography scan characterization of the nasopalatine canal. J Clin Periodontol. 2009;36(7):598-603. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051X.2009.01429.x
4. 4. Mraiwa N, Jacobs R, Van Cleynenbreugel J, Sanderink G, Schutyser F, Suetens P, et al. The nasopalatine canal revisited using 2D and 3D CT imaging. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2004;33(6):396-402. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr/53801969
5. 5. Verardi S, Pastagia J. Obliteration of the nasopalatine canal in conjunction with horizontal ridge augmentation. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2012 Feb;33(2):116-22.
6. 6. Artzi Z, Nemcovsky CE, Bitlitum I, Segal P. Displacement of the incisive foramen in conjunction with implant placement in the anterior maxilla without jeopardizing vitality of nasopalatine nerve and vessels: a novel surgical approach. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2000;11(5):505-10. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.2000.011005505.x
7. 7. Akkoca F, Yeşilova E. Assessment of the naso-maxilla and related dentoalveolar region with cone beam computed tomography. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2023;38(5):885-96. https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.10309
8. 8. López Jornet P, Boix P, Sánchez Pérez A, Boracchia A. Morphological characterization of the anterior palatine region using cone beam computed tomography. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2015 Oct;17(Suppl 2):e459-e464. https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.12271

9. 9. Bahşi I, Orhan M, Kervancıoğlu P, Yalçın ED, Aktan AM, et al. Anatomical evaluation of nasopalatine canal on cone beam computed tomography images. Folia Morphol (Warsz). 2019;78(1):153-62. https://doi.org/10.5603/FM.a2018.0084
10. 10. Özçakır-Tomruk C, Dölekoğlu S, Özkurt-Kayahan Z, İlgüy D. Evaluation of morphology of the nasopalatine canal using cone-beam computed tomography in a subgroup of Turkish adult population. Surg Radiol Anat. 2016;38:65-70. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00276-015-1520-x
11. 11. Etoz M, Sisman Y. Evaluation of the nasopalatine canal and variations with cone-beam computed tomography. Surg Radiol Anat. 2014;36:805-12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00276-014-1259-9
12. 12. Gönül Y, Bucak A, Atalay Y, Beker-Acay M, Çalişkan A, Sakarya G, et al. MDCT evaluation of nasopalatine canal morphometry and variations: an analysis of 100 patients. Diagn Interv Imaging. 2016;97(11):1165-72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diii.2015.11.012
13. 13. Khojastepour L, Haghnegahdar A, Keshtkar M. Morphology and dimensions of nasopalatine canal: a radiographic analysis using cone beam computed tomography. J Dent (Shiraz). 2017;18(4):244-9.
14. 14. Rai S, Misra D, Misra A, Khatri M, Kidwai S, Bisla S, et al. Significance of morphometric and anatomic variations of nasopalatine canal on cone-beam computed tomography in anterior functional zone: a retrospective study. Ann Maxillofac Surg. 2021;11(1):108-14. https://doi.org/10.4103/ams.ams_283_20
15. 15. Mardinger O, Namani-Sadan N, Chaushu G, Schwartz-Arad D. Morphologic changes of the nasopalatine canal related to dental implantation: a radiologic study in different degrees of absorbed maxillae. J Periodontol. 2008;79(9):1659-62. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2008.080043
16. 16. Tözüm TF, Güncü GN, Yıldırım YD, Yılmaz HG, Galindo-Moreno P, Velasco-Torres M, et al. Evaluation of maxillary incisive canal characteristics related to dental implant treatment with computerized tomography: a clinical multicenter study. J Periodontol. 2012 Mar;83(3):337-43. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2011.110326
17. 17. Tyrovolas S, Koyanagi A, Panagiotakos DB, Haro JM, Kassebaum NJ, Chrepa V, et al. Population prevalence of edentulism and its association with depression and self-rated health. Sci Rep. 2016;6:37083. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep37083
18. 18. Park HA, Shin SH, Ryu JI. Edentulous disparities among geriatric population according to the sexual difference in South Korea: a nationwide population-based study. Sci Rep. 2023;13(1):7854. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-35029-3
19. 19. Miracle AC, Mukherji SK. Conebeam CT of the head and neck, part 1: physical principles. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2009;30(6):1088-95. https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A1653
20. 20. Spin-Neto R, Gotfredsen E, Wenzel A. Impact of voxel size variation on CBCT-based diagnostic outcome in dentistry: a systematic review. J Digit Imaging. 2013;26(4):813-20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10278-012-9562-7
21. 21. Wolf TG, Fischer F, Schulze RKW. Correlation of objective image quality and working length measurements in different CBCT machines: An ex vivo study. Sci Rep. 2020;10(1):19414. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-76424-4