scholarly journals Analysis of Genial Tubercle Anatomy Using Cone Beam Computed Tomography – A Retrospective Study from Chennai, India

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (38) ◽  
pp. 3333-3337
Author(s):  
Abarna Jawahar ◽  
Maragathavalli Gopal

BACKGROUND Analysis of genial tubercle anatomy using three-dimensional (3D) imaging can be valuable in preparation for genioglossus advancement in the treatment of obstructive sleep apnoea, estimation of the safe zone prior to implant surgery and evaluation of mandibular asymmetry. Hence the intention of the study was to analyse the morphological pattern, dimensions of genial tubercles and their position in the mandible using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). METHODS A retrospective study was conducted on 100 patients scanned using Sirona Orthophos XG device in the Radiology department, Saveetha dental college and hospital. The genial tubercles were identified, morphological pattern of the genial tubercles was classified into four patterns and linear measurements of the genial tubercle height, width, position of genial tubercles on the mandible in the images were done. The collected data was tabulated and analysed using SPSS software. A paired t - test was used for intra examiner calibration and a chi-square test was used for comparison between genial tubercle patterns in both the sex. RESULTS On analysing the genial tubercle patterns, type I (44) was the most commonly seen followed by type II (24). Genial tubercles were not evident (type IV) in 20 patients. Type III (12) was least commonly seen among the pattern types. CONCLUSIONS The anatomy of genial tubercles is highly variable. The mean height of genial tubercles (GTH) measured was 5.36 mm and mean width of genial tubercles (GTW) measured was 5.24 mm. KEY WORDS Genial Tubercles, Anatomy, Cone Beam Computed Tomography, Mandible

Author(s):  
Jaynit Tandon ◽  
Sonali Taneja ◽  
Vidhi Kiran Bhalla ◽  
Akshay Rathore

Introduction: Adequate knowledge of the anatomic variation and root canal morphology is paramount for long term endodontic success. The presence of two canals in Mesiobuccal (MB) root is commonly associated with maxillary molars in various populations. Aim: To retrospectively evaluate the prevalence of a second mesiobuccal canal (MB2) in maxillary first and second molars in Delhi-National Capital Region (NCR) population using Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) analysis. Materials and Methods: This retrospective study evaluated the records of complete maxillary CBCT scans of 204 maxillary first and second molars from January 2016 till May 2019 from different CBCT centres in Delhi-NCR region to determine the anatomy and morphology in June 2019. The prevalence of second MB2 canals was recorded and associated with age, gender and symmetry. The z-test for proportions was used to assess the differences among the subgroups. Results: The number of roots in 204 teeth in both maxillary molars were determined. The prevalence of 3-rooted configuration was 98.55% in maxillary first molars and 79.4% in maxillary 2nd molars. Also, in maxillary 2nd molars, 7.4% were single rooted and 13.2% had 2-rooted configuration. Three rooted configuration and variable canal number was commonly reported in maxillary molars. Prevalence of MB2 canal was 87.2% in maxillary 1st molars and 64.2% in maxillary 2nd molars. Also, the prevalence was 87.2% bilaterally in maxillary first molars and 65.7% on the right and 53.9% on the left in maxillary second molars respectively. Type IV canal configuration was most prevalent in 44.60% of maxillary first molars and type 1 configuration (35.78%) for the maxillary second molars. Conclusion: Prevalence of MB2 canals in maxillary first and second molars was found to be high in North Indian population and the clinician should suspect its presence in all cases. Prevalence of MB2 had bilaterally symmetrical distribution without any association with age or gender. The MB roots were more likely to exhibit type IV and type II canal configurations in maxillary first molars and type I and type II configurations in second molars.


2019 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. Process
Author(s):  
Rajamohan Rajakeerthi ◽  
Malli Suresh Babu Nivedhitha

Objective: The complex root canal anatomy is inherently colonised by microbial flora. Endodontic treatment success is always related to adequate disinfection of the root canal space, which ultimately affects the treatment outcome. A thorough understanding of the external and internal root canal anatomy by using adequately imaging modalities is essential before planning any treatment. The aim of this study was to investigate the number and morphology of the root canals of maxillary and mandibular premolars in Chennai population. Material and Methods: Full-size cone-beam computed tomographic images were randomly collected from 100 patients, resulting in a total of 200 first and 200 second maxillary premolars as well as 200 first and 200 second mandibular premolars. All the eight premolars were analysed in single patients, who underwent cone-beam computed tomography scanning during pre-operative assessment (before implant surgery, orthodontic treatment, diagnosis of dental-alveolar trauma or difficult root canal treatment). Total number of roots and root canals, frequency and correlations between men and women were recorded and statistically analysed by using chi-square tests. The root canal configurations were rated according to the Vertucci’s classification. Results: In the maxillary first premolar group (n = 200), 36.3% had 1 root, 56.7% had 2 roots and 7.0% had 3 roots, with most exhibiting a type IV canal configuration. In the maxillary second premolar group (n = 200), 60% had 1 root, 29.8% had 2 roots and 10.2% had 3 roots, with the majority of single-rooted second premolars exhibiting a type I canal configuration. In the mandibular first premolar group (n = 200), 80.5% had 1 root, 9.8% had 2 roots and 5% had 3 roots. In the mandibular second premolar group (n=200), 90.1% had 1 root, 6.4% had 2 roots and 3.5 % had 3 roots, with most exhibiting a type I canal configuration. No statistical correlation was found between number of roots, gender and tooth position. Conclusion: This cone-beam computed tomographic study confirmed previous anatomical and morphological investigations. Therefore, the possibility of additional root canals should be considered when treating premolars. Keywords: Cone-beam computed tomography; Mandibular; Maxillary; Premolar; Root canal; Morphology.


2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Aslıhan Akbulut ◽  
Beyza Ballı Akgöl ◽  
Kaan Orhan ◽  
Merve Bayram

Objectives: To define the prevalence of dehiscence and fenestration and classify them in terms of the localization of fenestrations in a random sampled group of children and adolescent patients using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT).Methods:  CBCT performed at the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology of patients referred by the paediatric dentistry clinic were included in this retrospective study. Image evaluations were performed by dentomaxillofacial radiologist (AA, asst. prof.), and these images were examined in three dimensions of the axial, coronal, and sagittal planes. Intraexaminer agreement for the evaluations were found acceptable. The presence/absence of dehiscence and/or fenestration, fenestration’s classification type, and localization of defects were recorded. Moreover, the presence/absence of periapical lesion in related root with dehiscence and fenestration was noted. For statistical analysis, The Chi-Square test, Fisher Freeman Halton Test, and Yates' Continuity of Correction were used.Results: 3061 roots in 1801 teeth of 120 cases were analyzed. The mean age was 9.97±2.22 years. Dehiscence was detected in 261(8.5%) roots of 161(8.9%) teeth, and fenestration was detected 63(2%) roots of 36(2%) teeth. The most common fenestration type was Type I, followed by Type II and IV. Dehiscence was observed more frequently in primary teeth than permanent teeth, and the difference was statistically significant (p:0.000). Dehiscence and fenestration incidence in maxillary teeth was significantly higher than in the mandibular teeth (pdehiscence:0.000, pfenestration:0.004). Apical lesions were observed more in primary teeth than permanent teeth for both defects.Conclusions: This study concludes that alveolar dehiscence and fenestrations are more common in primary teeth than permanent teeth. Moreover, these defects were detected more for the teeth in the maxilla. Concerning endodontic and orthodontic therapies in maxilla, use of CBCT is useful in determining the region's anatomical structure accurately in suspected cases of child and adolescent patients.


Author(s):  
Shirin Sakhdari ◽  
Sara Farahani ◽  
Ehsan Asnaashari ◽  
Sahel Marjani

Objective: This study sought to assess the frequency and severity of second molar external root resorption (ERR) due to the adjacent third molar and its correlation with the position of third molar and other related factors using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). Materials and Methods: This cross-sectional study evaluated 320 second molars and their adjacent impacted third molars on CBCT scans of patients over 16 years, retrieved from the archives of Azad University Radiology Department. Presence/absence of second molar ERR, its location and severity (if present), and position of adjacent third molar were determined on CBCT scans, and recorded in a checklist. Data were analyzed using a logistic regression model. Results: The frequency of second molar ERR was 33.4% in the mandible and 14% in the maxilla. The severity of ERR was significantly correlated with the involved jaw (P=0.001) but had no correlation with age, gender, or depth of impaction of adjacent third molar (P>0.05). The mesioangular and horizontal positions of impacted third molars had a significant correlation with the frequency of second molar ERR (P<0.006). Conclusion: According to the results of this study, ERR occurring in second molars adjacent to third molars is common, especially in the mandible. Mesially inclined third molars have a greater potential of being associated with ERR in second molars.


2018 ◽  
Vol 22 (4) ◽  
pp. 379-384 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luciano Teles Gomes ◽  
Carlos Fernando de Almeida Barros Mourão ◽  
Cícero Luiz Braga ◽  
Luiz Fernando Duarte de Almeida ◽  
Rafael Coutinho de Mello-Machado ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document