Correlation of mandibular impacted tooth and bone morphology determined by cone beam computed topography on a premise of third molar operation
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.
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).
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 %.
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.
KeywordsCone-beam computed tomography Molar Third Mandible Inferior alveolar nerve
- 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
- 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
- 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
- 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
- 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