Сross-sectional anatomic study of direct positional relationships between mandibular canal and roots of posterior teeth using cone beam computed tomography.
AbstractObjectives: To establish the frequency of the various types of direct contacts of the root apices with the wall of the mandibular canal and to determine gender differences in number of such contacts in a selected Belarusian population using cone beam computed tomography. Methodology: One hundred and two cone beam computed tomography scans were analyzed to classify the types of contact and three-dimensional relationship between the mandibular teeth and the mandibular canal. Results: The direct contact between the teeth and the mandibular canal was observed in 63.7% of patients. Overall 300 roots of 189 teeth were in direct contact with the mandibular canal: 9.3% were second premolars, 14.7% were first molars, 33.8% were second molars and 50.0% were third molars. There were no statistically significant differences in the number of teeth with direct contact with the mandibular canal between males and females. Conclusion: The direct contact of the root apices with the mandibular canal was most often found in the second and third molars. The root apices of the third molars had the greatest variability of location relatively to the mandibular canal.
2. Singh V. Textbook of Anatomy Head, Neck, and Brain Volume III. 2nd Ed. India: Elsevier; 2014.
3. Bürklein S, Grund C, Schäfer E. Relationship between Root Apices and the Mandibular Canal: A Cone-beam Computed Tomographic Analysis in a German Population. J Endod. 2015;41(10):1696–700.
4. Zahedi S, Mostafavi M, Lotfirikan N. Anatomic Study of Mandibular Posterior Teeth Using Cone-beam Computed Tomography for Endodontic Surgery. J Endod. 2018;44(5):738–43.
5. Aksoy U, Aksoy S, Orhan K. A cone-beam computed tomography study of the anatomical relationships between mandibular teeth and the mandibular canal, with a review of the current literature. Microsc Res Tech. 2018;81(3):308–14.
6. Hiremath H, Agarwal R, Hiremath V, Phulambrikar T. Evaluation of proximity of mandibular molars and second premolar to inferior alveolar nerve canal among central Indians: A cone-beam computed tomographic retrospective study. Indian J Dent Res. 2016;27(3):312–6.
7. Alves FR, Coutinho MS, Gonçalves LS. Endodontic-related facial paresthesia: systematic review. J Can Dent Assoc. 2014;80:e13.
8. Chong BS, Quinn A, Pawar RR, Makdissi J, Sidhu SK. The anatomical relationship between the roots of mandibular second molars and the inferior alveolar nerve. Int Endod J. 2015;48(6):549–55.
9. Scolozzi P, Lombardi T, Jaques B. Successful inferior alveolar nerve decompression for dysesthesia following endodontic treatment: report of 4 cases treated by mandibular sagittal osteotomy. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2004;97(5):625–31.
10. Kawashima Y, Sakai O, Shosho D, Kaneda T, Gohel A. Proximity of the Mandibular Canal to Teeth and Cortical Bone. J Endod. 2016;42(2):221–4.
11. Gu L, Zhu C, Chen K, Liu X, Tang Z. Anatomic study of the position of the mandibular canal and corresponding mandibular third molar on cone-beam computed tomography images. Surg Radiol Anat. 2018;40(6):609–14.
12. Lee B, Park Y, Ahn J, Chun J, Park S, Kim M, Jo Y, Ahn S, Kim B, Choi S. Assessment of the proximity between the mandibular third molar and inferior alveolar canal using preoperative 3D-CT to prevent inferior alveolar nerve damage. Maxillofac Plast Reconstr Surg. 2015;37(1):30.
13. Schneider T, Filo K, Kruse AL, Locher M, Grätz KW, Lübbers HT. Variations in the anatomical positioning of impacted mandibular wisdom teeth and their practical implications. Swiss Dent J. 2014;124(5):520–38.
14. Kovisto T, Ahmad M, Bowles WR. Proximity of the mandibular canal to the tooth apex. J Endod. 2011;37(3):311–5.
15. Nair UP, Yazdi MH, Nayar GM, Parry H, Katkar RA, Nair MK. Configuration of the inferior alveolar canal as detected by cone beam computed tomography. Conserv Dent. 2013;16(6):518–21.
16. Yousuf W, Khan M, Mehdi H. Endodontic Procedural Errors: Frequency, Type of Error, and the Most Frequently Treated Tooth. Int J Dent. 2015;2015:673914.
17. Simonton JD, Azevedo B, Schindler WG, Hargreaves KM. Age- and gender-related differences in the position of the inferior alveolar nerve by using cone beam computed tomography. J Endod. 2009;35(7):944–9.
18. Ghaeminia H, Meijer GJ, Soehardi A, Borstlap WA, Mulder J, Bergé SJ. Position of the impacted third molar in relation to the mandibular canal. Diagnostic accuracy of cone beam computed tomography compared with panoramic radiography. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2009;38(9):964–71.
19. Xu GZ, Yang C, Fan XD, Yu CQ, Cai XY, Wang Y, He D. Anatomic relationship between impacted third mandibular molar and the mandibular canal as the risk factor of inferior alveolar nerve injury. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2013;51(8):e215–9.
20. Polycarpou N, Ng YL, Canavan D, Moles DR, Gulabivala K. Prevalence of persistent pain after endodontic treatment and factors affecting its occurrence in cases with complete radiographic healing. Int Endod J. 2005;38(3):169–78.
The copyright of all the articles published in the J Oral Res. belongs to the Universidad de Concepción, Chile. All information about theJ Oral Res. is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution License 3.0 and must be cited correctly.