Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comparison between panoramic radiography and cone-beam computed tomography findings for assessment of the relationship between impacted mandibular third molars and the mandibular canal

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Oral Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

The aim of this study was to assess the relationship between the mandibular canal and impacted mandibular third molars using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and to compare the CBCT findings with panoramic radiographic signs.

Methods

This study involved a retrospective radiographic review of 781 impacted third molars in 500 patients who showed a close relationship between the mandibular canal and the third molars on panoramic radiographs. Panoramic radiographic images were evaluated for interruption of the white line, darkening of the roots, diversion of the mandibular canal/roots, and narrowing of the mandibular canal/roots. The authors evaluated CBCT images to determine the course of each canal and its proximity to the roots. The statistical correlations between the panoramic radiography and CBCT findings were examined using the Chi-square test and Fisher’s exact test.

Results

Cone-beam computed tomography examination showed that darkening of the roots and deviation of the canal associated with the absence of corticalization between the mandibular third molar and the mandibular canal on panoramic radiographs were statistically significant, both as isolated findings and in association. No significant associations were observed for the other panoramic radiographic findings, either individually or in association.

Conclusions

The results of this study suggest that darkening of the roots, deviation of the mandibular canal, and interruption of the white line observed on panoramic radiographs, both as isolated findings and in association, were effective for determining the risk relationship between the roots and the mandibular canal, requiring three-dimensional evaluation of such cases.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Dalili Z, Mahjoub P, Sigaroudi AK. Comparison between cone beam computed tomography and panoramic radiography in the assessment of the relationship between the mandibular canal and impacted class C mandibular third molars. Dent Res J (Isfahan). 2011;8:203–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Brann CR, Brickley MR, Shepherd JP. Factors influencing nerve damage during lower third molar surgery. Br Dent J. 1999;186:514–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Gülicher D, Gerlach KL. Incidence, risk factors and follow-up of sensation disorders after surgical wisdom tooth removal. Study of 1106 cases. Mund Kiefer Gesichtschir. 2000;4:99–104.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Strietzel FP, Reichart PA. Wound healing after surgical wisdom tooth extraction. Evidence-based analysis. Mund Kiefer Gesichtschir. 2002;6:74–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Rood JP, Shehab BA. The radiological prediction of inferior alveolar nerve injury during third molar surgery. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1990;28:20–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Howe GL, Poyton HG. Prevention of damage to the inferior dental nerve during the extraction of mandibular third molars. Br Dent J. 1960;199:355–63.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Rud J. Third molar surgery: relationship of root to mandibular canal and injuries to the inferior dental nerve. Tandlaegebladet. 1983;87:619–31.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Öhman A, Kivijärvi K, Blomböck U, Flygare L. Pre-operative radiographic evaluation of lower third molars with computed tomography. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2006;35:30–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. de Melo Albert DG, Gomes AC, do Egito Vasconcelos BC, de Oliveira e Silva ED, Holanda GZ. Comparison of orthopantomographs and conventional tomography images for assessing the relationship between impacted lower third molars and the mandibular canal. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2006;64:1030–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Swanson AE. Incidence of inferior alveolar nerve injury in mandibular third molar surgery. J Can Dent Assoc. 1991;57:327–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Jhamb A, Dolas R, Pandilwar P, Mohanty S. Comparative efficacy of spiral computed tomography and orthopantomography in preoperative detection of relation of inferior alveolar neurovascular bundle to the impacted mandibular third molar. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2009;67:58–66.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Szalma J, Lempel E, Jeges S, Olasz L. Darkening of third molar roots: panoramic radiographic associations with inferior alveolar nerve exposure. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2011;69:1544–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Bell GW. Use of dental panoramic tomographs to predict the relation between mandibular third molar teeth and the inferior alveolar. Radiological and surgical findings, and clinical outcome. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2004;42:21–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Nakamori K, Fujiwara K, Miyazaki A, Tomihara K, Tsuji M, Nakai M, et al. Clinical assessment of the relationship between the third molar and the inferior alveolar canal using panoramic images and computed tomography. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2008;66:2308–13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. 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;38:964–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Gomes AC, Vasconcelos BGE, Silva EDO, Caldas AF, Neto IVP. Sensitivity and specificity of pantomography to predict inferior alveolar nerve damage during extraction of impacted lower third molars. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2008;66:256–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Szalma J, Lempel E, Jeges S, Szabó G, Olasz L. The prognostic value of panoramic radiography of inferior alveolar nerve damage after mandibular third molar removal: retrospective study of 400 cases. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2009;109:294–302.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Blaeser BF, August MA, Donoff RB, Kaban LB, Dodson TB. Panoramic radiographic risk factors for inferior alveolar nerve injury after third molar extraction. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2003;61:417–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Monaco G, Montevecchi M, Bonetti GA, Gatto MRA, Checchi L. Reliability of panoramic radiography in evaluating the topographic relationship between the mandibular canal and impacted third molars. J Am Dent Assoc. 2004;135:312–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Maegawa H, Sano K, Kitagawa Y, Ogasawara T, Miyauchi K, Sekine J, et al. 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. 2003;96:639–46.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Mahasantipiya PM, Savage NW, Monsour PAJ, Wilson RJ. Narrowing of the inferior dental canal in relation to the lower third molars. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2005;34:154–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Neves FS, Souza TC, Almeida SM, Haiter-Neto F, Freitas DQ, Bóscolo FN. Correlation of panoramic radiography and cone beam CT findings in the assessment of the relationship between impacted mandibular third molars and the mandibular canal. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2012;41:553–7.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Pell GJ, Gregory GT. Impacted mandibular third molars: classification and modified technique for removal. Dent Dig. 1933;39:330–8.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Tantanapornkul W, Okouchi K, Fujiwara Y, Yamashiro Y, Maruoka Y, Ohbayashi N, et al. A comparative study of cone-beam computed tomography and conventional panoramic radiography in assessing the topographic relationship between the mandibularcanal and impacted third molars. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2007;103:253–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Miller CS, Nummikoski PV, Barnett DA, et al. Cross-sectional tomography: a diagnostic technique for determining the buccolingual relationship of impacted mandibular third molars and the inferior alveolar neurovascular bundle. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1990;70:791.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Tantanapornkul W, Okochi K, Bhakdinaronk A, Ohbayashi N, Kurabayashi T. Correlation of darkening of impacted mandibular third molar root on digital panoramic images with cone beam computed tomography findings. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2009;38:11–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Nakagawa Y, Ishii H, Nomura Y, Watanabe NY, Hoshiba D, Kobayashi K, et al. Third molar position: reliability of panoramic radiography. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2007;65:1303–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Jung YH, Nah KS, Cho BH. Correlation of panoramic radiographs and cone beam computed tomography in the assessment of a superimposed relationship between the mandibular canal and impacted third molars. Imaging Sci Dent. 2012;42:121–7.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Kaeppler G. Conventional cross-sectional tomographic evaluation of mandibular third molars. Quintessence Int. 2000;31:49–56.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Yu SK, Lee JU, Kim KA, Koh KJ. Positional relationship between mandibular third molar and mandibular canal in cone beam computed tomographs. Korean J Oral Maxillofac Radiol. 2007;37:197–203.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Tammisalo T, Happonen RP, Tammisalo EH. Stereographic assessment of mandibular canal in relation to the roots of impacted lower third molar using multiprojection narrow beam radiography. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1992;21:85–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Carmichael FA, McGowan DA. Incidence of nerve damage following third molar removal: a West of Scotland Oral Surgery Research Group study. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1992;30:78–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

Ahmet Ercan Sekerci and Yildiray Sisman declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Faculty of Dentistry, Erciyes University, 38039, Kayseri, Turkey

    Ahmet Ercan Şekerci & Yildiray Şişman

Authors
  1. Ahmet Ercan Şekerci
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yildiray Şişman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ahmet Ercan Şekerci.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Şekerci, A.E., Şişman, Y. Comparison between panoramic radiography and cone-beam computed tomography findings for assessment of the relationship between impacted mandibular third molars and the mandibular canal. Oral Radiol 30, 170–178 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-013-0158-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-013-0158-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation