scholarly journals The comparison of roof visibility of the mandibular canal between cone-beam computed tomography scans and panoramic radiograph images as dependent on the cortical bone thickness of the mandible

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ali-Reza Ketabi ◽  
Angeliki Zelka ◽  
Hans-Christoph Lauer ◽  
Stefan Hassfeld

Abstract Background Accurate detection of the mandibular canal is a difficult process despite cutting-edge radiographic methods. The present study analyses whether mandibular canal roof visibility is comparable to panoramic radiography (PR) and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and, further, examines whether the visibility in PR and CBCT is dependent on cortical bone thickness in the mandible. Methods This study was conducted on a group of 343 selected patients. It incorporated anonymised data on 343 patients in which a CBCT and PR were available. The first stage examines whether the mandibular canal roof visibility is comparable to PR and CBCT. In the second stage, measurements of cortical bone thickness showed buccal and lingual in the P2, M1, M2 and M3 teeth areas, both to the left and right of the mandible in CBCT images. Statistical analysis was supported by statistical software (IBM SPSS 25; Armonk, NY, USA). Results The mean age of the patients was 58.8 years with an almost equal gender distribution. When performing a McNemar test on the P2, M1, M2 and M3 on both the left and right jaws, the difference between the two image modalities, with regard to the visibility of the canal roof, was found to be significant (McNemar test, p < 0.001). Statistically (U test, p≥0.05), it follows that the thickness of the cortical bone of the mandible exerts no influence on the visibility of the roof of canalis mandibulae in PR and CBCT images. Conclusion We conclude that the visibility of the mandibular canal in PR and CBCT rays is not identical, and that the thickness of the cortical bone in the mandible does not represent a factor affecting the visibility of the roof of the mandibular canal.

2020 ◽  
Vol 54 (4) ◽  
pp. 325-331
Author(s):  
Kalyani Trivedi ◽  
Bharvi K Jani ◽  
Sagar Hirani ◽  
Mansi V Radia

Aim: The purpose of this study was to use measurements from cone beam computed tomography scans to quantify the cortical bone thickness of mandibular buccal shelf region and preferable site for buccal shelf implant placement in 10 hyperdivergent and 10 hypodivergent patients. Method: 20 cone beam computed tomographies were equally divided based on divergence. 6 sites were examined: mesial of first molar (6M), middle of first molar (6Mi), interdental between the first and second molar (Id), mesial of second molar (7M), middle of second molar (7Mi), and distal of second molar (7D). The study quantified the mandibular buccal shelf relative to its angle of slope, the cortical bone thickness measured perpendicular to the bone surface, the amount of cortical bone 30° angle to the bone surface. The cortical bone thickness was measured perpendicular and at a 30° angle at 3, 5, and 7 mm from the alveolar crest. Result: Significant change is seen at the buccal shelf slope at 6M ( P = .001) and further increase in this angle till 7D ( P = .003). Mean amount of cortical bone for hyperdivergent group at 7D is 4.77 ± 0.68 mm and for hypodivergent group is 3.86 ± 0.70 mm. Statistically significant differences were noted at insertion site at 90° and 30° for both groups at 3, 5, and 7 mm from the alveolar crest. Conclusion: Preferable site for buccal shelf implant placement is distal to the mandibular second molar. The maximum amount of cortical bone is found distal to the second molar 7 mm vertically from alveolar crest when the buccal shelf implant is placed at 30° angulation for hyperdivergent group.


2017 ◽  
Vol 123 (6) ◽  
pp. 707-713 ◽  
Author(s):  
Monikelly do Carmo Chagas Nascimento ◽  
Solange Maria de Almeida Boscolo ◽  
Francisco Haiter-Neto ◽  
Emanuela Carla dos Santos ◽  
Ivo Lambrichts ◽  
...  

Odontology ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 108 (4) ◽  
pp. 669-675 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonino Lo Giudice ◽  
Lorenzo Rustico ◽  
Alberto Caprioglio ◽  
Marco Migliorati ◽  
Riccardo Nucera

2017 ◽  
Vol 23 ◽  
pp. 5812-5817 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ozkan Adiguzel ◽  
Ceren Aktuna Belgin ◽  
Seda Falakaloglu ◽  
Suzan Cangul ◽  
Zeki Akkus

2014 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 64-72
Author(s):  
Seyed Hossein Moslemzade ◽  
Yusef Kananizadeh ◽  
Amin Nourizadeh ◽  
Aydin Sohrabi ◽  
Mehrdad Panjnoosh ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document