Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Morphological and topographic evaluation of the mandibular canal and its relationship with the facial profile, skeletal class, and sex

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of this study was to evaluate the morphology and topography of the mandibular canal in patients with different facial profiles, skeletal classes, and sexes.

Methods

Cone-beam computed tomography volumes of 103 patients were classified according to facial profile and skeletal class. Two examiners classified the mandibular canal into a linear, spoon-shaped, elliptical arc, or turning curvature and measured four related linear distances. The most frequent mandibular canal curvature was identified and multi-way ANOVA with Tukey’s test compared the linear measurements between facial types, skeletal class, and sexes (α = 0.05). Kappa and intraclass correlation coefficients were used to assess the reproducibility of qualitative and quantitative variables, respectively.

Results

The examiners showed excellent reproducibility. The four curvatures of the mandibular canal were found, but the spoon-shaped and elliptical arch were the most frequent. No significant differences were observed for most of the linear measurements between the different facial profiles, skeletal classes, and sexes (p > 0.05).

Conclusion

Spoon-shaped and elliptical arch are the most frequent curvatures of the mandibular canal; furthermore, its morphology and topography seem to be little influenced by the facial profile, skeletal class, and sex.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

If needed, the authors make available the raw data of this study.

Code availability

Not applicable.

References

  1. Liu T, Xia B, Gu Z (2009) Inferior alveolar canal course: a radiographic study. Clin Oral Implants Res 20:1212–1218. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2009.01736.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. de Oliveira-Santos C, Souza PHC, de Azambuja B-C et al (2012) Assessment of variations of the mandibular canal through cone beam computed tomography. Clin Oral Investig 16:387–393. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-011-0544-9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Jung Y-H, Cho B-H (2014) Radiographic evaluation of the course and visibility of the mandibular canal. Imaging Sci Dent 44:273. https://doi.org/10.5624/isd.2014.44.4.273

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Koivisto T, Chiona D, Milroy LL et al (2016) Mandibular canal location: cone-beam computed tomography examination. J Endod 42:1018–1021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2016.03.004

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. von Arx T, Lozanoff S (2017) Mandibular canal. Clinical oral anatomy. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 323–368

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  6. Simonton JD, Azevedo B, Schindler WG, Hargreaves KM (2009) Age- and gender-related differences in the position of the inferior alveolar nerve by using cone beam computed tomography. J Endod 35:944–949. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2009.04.032

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Smith WP (2013) The relative risk of neurosensory deficit following removal of mandibular third molar teeth: the influence of radiography and surgical technique. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 115:18–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oooo.2012.03.017

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Galli M, Barausse C, Masi I et al (2015) Inferior alveolar nerve laceration after implant site preparation: a case report. Eur J Oral Implantol 8:293–296

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Kawashima Y, Sakai O, Shosho D et al (2016) Proximity of the mandibular canal to teeth and cortical bone. J Endod 42:221–224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2015.11.009

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Khorshidi H, Raoofi S, Ghapanchi J et al (2017) Cone beam computed tomographic analysis of the course and position of mandibular canal. J Maxillofac Oral Surg 16:306–311. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12663-016-0956-9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Angelopoulos C, Thomas S, Hechler S et al (2008) Comparison between digital panoramic radiography and cone-beam computed tomography for the identification of the mandibular canal as part of presurgical dental implant assessment. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 66:2130–2135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2008.06.021

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Mezzomo CL, Machado PG, de Pacheco A, B, et al (2010) As implicações da classe II de angle e da desproporção esquelética tipo classe II no aspecto miofuncional. Rev CEFAC 13:728–734. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1516-18462010005000079

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Fontenele RC, Farias Gomes A, Moreira NR, et al (2021) Do the location and dimensions of the mental foramen differ among individuals of different facial types and skeletal classes? A CBCT study. J Prosthet Dent 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2021.07.004

  14. Knigge RP, McNulty KP, Oh H et al (2021) Geometric morphometric analysis of growth patterns among facial types. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 160:430–441. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2020.04.038

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Saadeh M, Fayyad-Kazan H, Haddad R, Ayoub F (2020) Facial soft tissue thickness differences among different vertical facial patterns. Forensic Sci Int 317:110468. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2020.110468

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Schmidt APG, Rossi AC, Freire AR et al (2016) Association between facial type and mandibular canal morphology - analysis in digital panoramic radiographs. Braz Dent J 27:609–612. https://doi.org/10.1590/0103-6440201600973

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. da Costa ED, Nejaim Y, Martins LAC et al (2019) Morphological evaluation of the nasopalatine canal in patients with different facial profiles and ages. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 77:721–729. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2018.11.025

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Ramírez-Sotelo LR, Almeida S, Ambrosano GM, Scolo FB (2012) Validity and reproducibility of cephalometric measurements performed in full and hemifacial reconstructions derived from cone beam computed tomography. Angle Orthod 82:827–832. https://doi.org/10.2319/072711-473.1

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Ricketts RM (1960) A foundation for cephalometric communication. Am J Orthod 46:330–357. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(60)90047-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Bavia PF, Rodrigues Garcia RCM (2016) Vertical craniofacial morphology and its relation to temporomandibular disorders. J Oral Maxillofac Res 7:1–8. https://doi.org/10.5037/jomr.2016.7206

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Steiner CC (1953) Cephalometrics for you and me. Am J Orthod 39:729–755. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(53)90082-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Landis JR, Koch GG (1977) The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33:159. https://doi.org/10.2307/2529310

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Cicchetti DV (1994) Guidelines, criteria, and rules of thumb for evaluating normed and standardized assessment instruments in psychology. Psychol Assess 6:284–290. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.6.4.284

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Lin C-S, Wu S-Y, Huang H-Y, Lai Y-L (2016) Systematic review and meta-analysis on incidence of altered sensation of mandibular implant surgery. PLoS ONE 11:e0154082. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0154082

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This work was supported by the São Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP), Brazil (grant number #2019/17615–4).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Oral Radiology, Department of Oral Diagnosis, Piracicaba Dental School, University of Campinas, 901, Limeira Ave, Piracicaba, SP, Brazil

    Gustavo Moraes Prado, Rocharles Cavalcante Fontenele, Eliana Dantas Costa, Deborah Queiroz Freitas & Matheus L. Oliveira

  2. Department of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry of Ribeirao Preto, University of Sao Paulo, Cafe Ave, Ribeirao Preto, SP, Brazil

    Eliana Dantas Costa

Authors
  1. Gustavo Moraes Prado
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rocharles Cavalcante Fontenele
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Eliana Dantas Costa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Deborah Queiroz Freitas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Matheus L. Oliveira
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Prado, GM: acquisition of data, analysis of data, drafting of article, final approval of the manuscript. Fontenele, RC: conception and design, acquisition of data, analysis of data, critical revision, final approval of the manuscript. Costa, ED: conception and design, acquisition of data, analysis of data, critical revision, final approval of the manuscript. Freitas, DQ: analysis of data, critical revision, final approval of the manuscript. Oliveira, ML: conception and design, analysis of data, drafting of article, critical revision, final approval of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Matheus L. Oliveira.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval

This study was approved by the local Ethics Committee (protocol CAAE 14771119.2.0000.5418).

Consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

All authors have viewed and agreed to this submission.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Prado, G.M., Fontenele, R.C., Costa, E.D. et al. Morphological and topographic evaluation of the mandibular canal and its relationship with the facial profile, skeletal class, and sex. Oral Maxillofac Surg 27, 17–23 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10006-022-01058-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10006-022-01058-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation