MANDİBULAR ÜÇÜNCÜ MOLAR DİŞLERİN GÖMÜLÜ KALMA SIKLIĞI İLE MORFOMETRİK FAKTÖRLER ARASINDAKİ KORELASYON

Öz

AMAÇ: Bu retrospektif çalışmanın amacı, mandibular morfometrik parametreler (ramus uzunluğu, korpus uzunluğu, alveolar kret yüksekliği ve retromolar boşluk) ile mandibular üçüncü molar dişlerin gömülü kalma durumu arasındaki ilişkiyi konik ışınlı bilgisayarlı tomografi (KIBT) kullanarak değerlendirmektir.
GEREÇ VE YÖNTEM: 2019–2023 yılları arasında çekilmiş, mandibulada diş eksikliği veya patolojisi bulunmayan 17-34 yaş aralığındaki 215 hastaya ait KIBT görüntüleri retrospektif olarak incelendi. Hastalar, mandibular üçüncü molar dişlerin sürme durumuna göre gömülü ve kontrol gruplarına ayrıldı. Morfometrik ölçümler ve bu ölçümler arasındaki oranlar gruplar arasında karşılaştırıldı.
BULGULAR: Ramus (A) ve korpus (B) uzunlukları, alveolar kret yüksekliği (X) ve retromolar boşluk (Y) değerleri gömülü grupta kontrol grubuna kıyasla anlamlı derecede daha düşük bulundu (p < 0,05). Korpus uzunluğunun retromolar boşluğa oranının (B/Y), gömülülük açısından prediktif bir değere sahip olduğu saptandı. Ayrıca, cinsiyete bağlı morfometrik farklılıklar gözlendi ve kadınlarda gömülülük oranının daha yüksek olduğu belirlendi.
SONUÇ: Mandibular morfometrik parametreler ve bu parametreler arasındaki oransal ilişkiler, üçüncü molar dişlerin gömülü kalma riskinin öngörülmesinde önemli olabilir. KIBT kullanılarak yapılan detaylı morfometrik analizlerin, gömülü dişlerin etiyolojisinin daha iyi anlaşılmasına ve klinik öngörüye katkı sağlayabileceği düşünülmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Gömülü
• Molar
• Mandibula.

CORRELATION BETWEEN THE FREQUENCY OF MANDIBULAR THIRD MOLAR IMPACTION AND MORPHOMETRIC FACTORS

Öz

OBJECTIVE: This retrospective study aimed to evaluate the correlation between mandibular morphometric parameters (ramus length, corpus length, alveolar crest height, and retromolar space) and the impaction status of mandibular third molars using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT).
MATERIAL AND METHODS: The CBCT images of 215 patients aged 17-34 years, with no missing teeth or pathology in the mandible, obtained between 2019 and 2023, were examined. The patients were categorized into impacted and control groups based on the eruption status of the mandibular third molars. The morphometric measurements and the ratios between these measurements were compared.
RESULTS: The ramus (A) and corpus (B) lengths, alveolar crest height (X), and retromolar space (Y) were significantly lower in the impacted group compared with the control group (p < 0.05). The ratio of corpus length to retromolar space (B/Y) showed predictive value for impaction. Moreover, sex-related morphometric differences were detected, with a higher impaction rate in females.
CONCLUSIONS: Mandibular morphometric parameters and their proportional relationships may be significant in predicting the risk of third molar impaction. The findings suggest that detailed morphometric analyses performed using CBCT can contribute to a better understanding of the etiology of impacted teeth and to clinical prediction.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Third
• Molar
• Mandible.

Kaynakça

1. 1. Hupp JR, Tucker MR, Ellis E. Contemporary Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery. 6th ed. St. Louis: Elsevier Health Sciences; 2013;6:143–68.
2. 2. Kaya G, Aslan M, Ömezli M, Dayi E. Some morphological features related to mandibular third molar impaction. J Clin Exp Dent. 2010;2(1):50–55.
3. 3. Saysel MY, Meral GD, Kocadereli I, Taşar F. The effects of first premolar extractions on third molar angulations. Angle Orthod. 2005;75(5):719–22.
4. 4. Modi JD, Gala SA, Dave HA, Gupte SH, Singh S. The assessment of the prevalence of impacted third molars and its relation to space available for eruption. Cureus. 2025;17(2):e78608.
5. 5. Topkara A, Sari Z. Investigation of third molar impaction in Turkish orthodontic patients. Eur J Dent. 2013;7(1):94–8.
6. 6. Yilmaz S, Adisen MZ, Misirlioglu M, Yorubulut S. Assessment of third molar impaction pattern and associated clinical symptoms. Med Princ Pract. 2016;25(2):169–75.
7. 7. Long H, Zhou Y, Liao L, Pyakurel U, Wang Y, et al. Coronectomy vs total removal for third molar extraction. J Dent Res. 2012;91(7):659–65.
8. 8. Zheng X, Lin X, Wang Z. Extraction of low horizontally and buccally impacted mandibular third molars. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2020;58(7):829–33.

9. 9. Altan A, Akbulut N. Does the angulation of an impacted mandibular third molar affect preoperative pathoses? J Dent (Shiraz). 2019;20(1):48–52.
10. 10. Genç BGÇ, Orhan K, Hıncal E. Maxillary and mandibular third molar impaction with associated pathologies. Appl Sci. 2022;12(11):5756.
11. 11. Al-Gunaid TH, Bukhari AK, El Khateeb SM, Yamaki M. Relationship of mandibular ramus dimensions to lower third molar impaction. Eur J Dent. 2019;13(2):213–21.
12. 12. Juodzbalys G, Daugela P. Mandibular third molar impaction: review of literature. J Oral Maxillofac Res. 2013;4(2):e1.
13. 13. Lauesen SR, Andreasen JO, Gerds TA, Christensen SS, Borum M, Hillerup S. Association between third mandibular molar impaction and root development. Angle Orthod. 2013;83(1):3–9.
14. 14. Barone S, Antonelli A, Averta F, et al. Does mandibular gonial angle influence eruption pattern? J Clin Med. 2021;10(18):1–10.
15. 15. Eyigör H, Yılmaz MD, Osma Ü, Koca R. Bilateral maxillary sinus dentigerous cyst containing ectopic teeth: a case report. [in Turkish] Kocatepe Tıp Dergisi. 2012;13(3):167–71.
16. 16. Gonca M, Gunacar DN, Kose TE, Karamehmetoglu I. Evaluation of mandibular morphologic measurements. Oral Radiol. 2022;38(1):63–71.
17. 17. Abu Alhaija ES, AlBhairan HM, AlKhateeb SN. Mandibular third molar space in different skeletal patterns. Eur J Orthod. 2011;33(5):570–6.
18. 18. Carter K, Worthington S. Predictors of third molar impaction. J Dent Res. 2016;95(3):267–76.
19. 19. Kindler S, Ittermann T, Bülow R, et al. Craniofacial morphology and third molar impaction. PLoS One. 2019;14(11):e0225444.
20. 20. Gupta S, Jain S. Orthopantomographic analysis of mandibular asymmetry. J Indian Orthod Soc.2012;46(1):33–7.
21. 21. Ongkosuwito EM, Dieleman MM, Kuijpers-Jagtman AM, et al. Linear mandibular measurements comparison. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2009;46(2):147–53.
22. 22. Ghaeminia H, Meijer GJ, Soehardi A, et al. Use of cone beam CT in wisdom tooth removal. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2011;40(8):834–9.
23. 23. Carter JB, Stone JD, Clark RS, Mercer JE. Applications of CBCT in oral and maxillofacial surgery. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2016;74(4):668–79.
24. 24. Dąbrowski P, Kulus M, Cieślik A, et al. Inverted and horizontal impacted third molars. Folia Morphol (Warsz). 2019;78(1):214–20.
25. 25. Hassan AH. Mandibular cephalometric characteristics in impacted third molars. Saudi Dent J. 2011;23(2):73– 80.
26. 26. Begtrup A, Grønastøð H, Christensen IJ, et al. Predicting lower third molar eruption. Eur J Orthod. 2013;35(4):460–6.
27. 27. Behbehani F, Artun J, Thalib L. Prediction of mandibular third-molar impaction. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2006;130(1):47–55.
28. 28. Ganss C, Hochban W, Kielbassa AM, Umstadt HE. Prognosis of third molar eruption. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1993;76(6):688–93.
29. 29. Hattab FN, Alhaija ES. Radiographic evaluation of third molar eruption space. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 1999;88(3):285–91.
30. 30. Gao Q, Zhou X, Zhao Z, et al. Mandibular retromolar space comparison. BMC Oral Health. 2024;24(1):1112.
31. 31. Capelli J Jr. Mandibular growth and third molar impaction. Angle Orthod. 1991;61(3):223–9.
32. 32. İbişoğlu GN, Uslu-Akcam O. Relationship between third molar impaction and mandibular morphology. BMC Oral Health. 2025;25(1):739.
33. 33. Indira AP, Markande A, David MP. Mandibular ramus as an indicator for sex determination. J Forensic Dent Sci. 2012;4(2):58–62.
34. 34. Al-Gunaid TH. Sex-related variation in mandibular ramus dimensions. J Taibah Univ Med Sci. 2020;15(4):298–304.
35. 35. Rezaei F, Imani MM, Khavid A, et al. Patterns of mandibular third molar impaction. Pesqui Bras Odontopediatria Clin Integr. 2020;20:e5411.
36. 36. Jeevitha JY, Thiagarajan A, Sivalingam B. Influence of mandibular ramal dimensions. J Pharm Bioallied Sci. 2022;14(1):364–8.
37. 37. Behrents R. Adult craniofacial growth. J Clin Orthod. 1986;20(12):842–7.