Surgical and Radiologic Anatomy

, Volume 35, Issue 4, pp 311–318 | Cite as

Correlation of mandibular impacted tooth and bone morphology determined by cone beam computed topography on a premise of third molar operation

  • M. A. Momin
  • K. Matsumoto
  • K. Ejima
  • R. Asaumi
  • T. Kawai
  • Y. Arai
  • K. Honda
  • T. Yosue
Original Article

Abstract

Purpose

To determine the width and morphology of the mandible in the impacted third molar region, and to identify the location of the mandibular canal prior to planning impacted third molar operations.

Methods

Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) data of 87 mandibular third molars from 62 Japanese patients were analyzed in this study. The width of the lingual cortical bone and apex-canal distance were measured from cross-sectional images in which the cortical bone was thinnest at the lingual side in the third molar region. Images were used for measuring the space (distance between the inner border of the lingual cortical bone and outer surface of the third molar root), apex-canal distance (distance from the root of the third molar tooth to the superior border of the inferior alveolar canal) and the cortical bone (width between the inner and outer borders of the lingual cortical bone).

Results

The means of the space, apex-canal distance and lingual cortical width were 0.31, 1.99, and 0.68 mm, respectively. Impacted third molar teeth (types A–C) were observed at the following frequencies: type A (angular) 37 %; type B (horizontal), 42 %; type C (vertical), 21 %. The morphology of the mandible at the third molar region (types D–F) was observed as: type D (round), 49 %; type E (lingual extended), 18 %; and type F (lingual concave), 32 %.

Conclusions

The width and morphology of the mandible with impacted teeth and the location of the mandibular canal at the third molar region could be clearly determined using cross-sectional CBCT images.

Keywords

Cone-beam computed tomography Molar Third Mandible Inferior alveolar nerve 

References

  1. 1.
    Araki K, Maki K, Seki K, Sakamaki K, Harata Y, sakaino R, Okano T, Seo K (2004) Characteristics of a newly developed dentomaxillofacial X-ray cone beam CT scanner: system configuration and physical properties. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 33:51–59PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Suomalainen A, Ventä I, Mattila M, Turtola L, Vehmas T, Peltola JS (2010) Reliability of CBCT and other radiographic methods in preoperative evaluation of lower third molars. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 109:276–284PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bataineh AB (2001) Sensory nerve impairment following mandibular third molar surgery. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 59:1012–1017PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Better H, Abramowitz I, Shlomi B, Kahn A, Levy Y, Shaham A, Chaushu G (2004) The presurgical workup before third molar surgery: how much is enough? J Oral Maxillofac Surg 62:689–692PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Brann CR, Brickley MR, Shepherd JP (1999) Factors influencing nerve damage during lower third molar surgery. Br Dent J 186:514PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Blaeser BF, August MA, Donoff RB, Kaban LB, Dodson TB (2003) Panoramic radiographic risk factors for inferior alveolar nerve injury after third molar extraction. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 61:417–421PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Carmichael FA, McGowan DA (1992) Incidences of nerve damage following third molar removal: a west of Scotland oral surgery research group study. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 30:78–82PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chiapasco M, De Cicco L, Marrone G (1993) Side effects and complications associated with third molar surgery. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 76(4):412–420PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Roeder Felix, Wachtlin Daniel, Schulze Ralf (2011) Necessity of 3D visualization for the removal of lower wisdom teeth: required sample size to prove non-inferiority of panoramic radiography compared to CBCT. Clin Oral Invest. doi:10.1007/s00784-011-0553-8 Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Feifel H, Riediger G, Gustorf-Aecerle R (1994) High resolution computed tomography of the inferior alveolar and lingual nerves. Neuroradiology 36:236–245PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Howe EL, Poyton HE (1960) Prevention of damage to the inferior dental nerve during the extraction of mandibular third molars. Br Dent J 109:355–363Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hillerup S (2007) Iatrogenic injury to oral branches of the trigeminal nerve: records of 449 cases. Clin Oral Invest 11:133–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Harris D, Buser D, Dula K, Grondahl K, Harris D, Jacobs R et al (2002) E.A.O. guidelines for the use of diagnostic imaging in implant dentistry. A consensus workshop organized by the European association for Osseointegration in Trinity college Dublin. Clin Oral Impl Res 3:566–570CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Heurich T, Ziegler C, Stevrling H, Wortche R, Muhling J, Hassfeld S (2002) Digital volume tomography an extension to the diagnostic procedures available for application before surgical removal of third molars. Mund Kiefer Gesichtschir 6:427–432PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Honey OB, Scarfe WC, Hilgers MJ, Klueber K, Silveira AM, Haskell BS et al (2007) Accuracy of cone-beam computed tomography imaging of the temporomandibular joint: comparisons with panoramic radiology and linear tomography. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 132:429–438CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Honda K, Arai Y, Kashima M, Sawada K, Ejima K, Iwai K (2004) Evaluation of the usefulness of the limited cone-beam CT (3DX) in the assessment of the thickness of the roof of the glenoid fossa of the temporomandibular joint. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 33:391–395PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ghaeminia H, Meijer GJ, Soehardi A, Borstlap WA, Mulder J, Berge′ SJ (2009) 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 38:964–971PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Inaoka SD, Carneiro SC, Vasconcelos BC, Leal J, Porto GG (2009) Relationship between mandibular fracture and impacted lower third molar. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal 14(7):E349–E354PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kipp DP, Goldstein BH, Weiss WW Jr (1980) Dysesthesia after mandibular third molar surgery: a retrospective study and analysis of 1377 surgical procedures. J Am Dent Assoc 100:185–192PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kijima N, Honda K, Kuroki Y, Sakabe J, Ejima K, Nakajima I (2007) Relationship between patient characteristics, mandibular head morphology and thickness of the roof of the glenoid fossa in symptomatic temporomandibular joints. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 36:277–281PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lopes V, Mumenya R, Feinmann C (1995) Third molar surgery: an audit of the indications for surgery, post-operative complaints and patient satisfaction. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 33:33–35PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ludlow JB, Davies-Ludlow LE, Brooks SL, Howerton WB (2006) Dosimetry of 3 CBCT devices for oral and maxillofacial radiology: CB Mercuray. NewTom 3G and i-CAT. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 35:219–226PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Flygare L, Öhman A (2008) Preoperative imaging procedures for lower wisdom teeth removal. Clin Oral Invest 12:291–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Maegawa H, Sano K, Kitagawa Y, Ogasawara T, Miyauchi K, Sekine J et al (2003) Preoperative assessment of the relationship between the mandibular third molar and the mandibular canal by axial computed tomography with coronal and sagittal reconstruction. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 96:639–646PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Momin MA, Okochi K, Watanabe H, Imaizumi A, Amagasa T, Okada N et al (2009) Diagnostic accuracy of cone-beam CT in the assessment of mandibular invasion of lower gingival carcinoma: comparison with conventional panoramic radiography. Eur J Radiol 72:75–81PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ohman A, Kivijarvi K, Blomback U, Flygare L (2006) Pre-operative radiographic evaluation of lower third molars with computed tomography. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 35:30–35PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Rigolone M, Pasqualini D, Bianchi L, Berutti E, Bianchi SD (2003) Vestibular surgical access to the palatine root of the superior first molar: “low-dose cone beam” CT ankylosis of the pathway and its anatomic variations. J Endod 29:773–775PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Szalma J, Lempel E, Jeges S, Szabo G, Olasz L (2010) The prognostic value of panoramic radiography of inferior nerve damage after mandibular third molar removal: retrospective study of 400 cases. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 109:294–302PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Sisk AL, Hammer WB, Shelton DW (1986) Complications following removal of impacted third molars. The role of the experience of the surgeon. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 44:855–859PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Sedaghatfar M, August MA, Dodson TB (2005) Panoramic radiographic findings as predictors of inferior alveolar nerve exposure following third molar extraction. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 63:3–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Tantanapornkul W, Okuchi K, Fujiwara Y, Yamashiro M, Maruoka Y, Ohbayashi N et al (2007) A comparative study of cone-beam computed tomography and conventional panoramic radiography in assessing the topographic relationship between the mandibular canal and impacted third molars. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 103:253–259PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    van Gool AV, Ten Bosch JJ, Boering G (1977) Clinical consequences of complaints and complications after removal of the mandibular third molar. Int J Oral Surg 6:29PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Wofford DT, Miller RI (1987) Prospective study of dysesthesia following odontectomy of impacted mandibular third molars. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 45:15–19PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Watanabe H, Momin MA, Kurabayashi T, Aoki H (2010) Mandible size and morphology determined with CT on a premise of dental implant operation. Surg Radiol Anat 32:343–349PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Szalma J, Edina L, Sára J, Olasz L (2011) Darkening of third molar roots: panoramic radiographic associations with inferior alveolar nerve exposure. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 69:1544–1549PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Palma-CarriÓ C, Garciá-Mira B, Larrazabal-MorÓn C, Peñarrocha-Diago M (2010) Radiographic signs associated with inferior alveolar nerve damage following third molar extraction. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal 15(6):e886–e890PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag France 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. A. Momin
    • 1
  • K. Matsumoto
    • 2
  • K. Ejima
    • 2
  • R. Asaumi
    • 1
  • T. Kawai
    • 1
  • Y. Arai
    • 2
  • K. Honda
    • 2
  • T. Yosue
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Oral and Maxillofacial RadiologyThe Nippon Dental University School of Life Dentistry at TokyoTokyoJapan
  2. 2.Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, School of DentistryNihon UniversityTokyoJapan

Personalised recommendations