Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Tomographic evaluation on bone morphology in posterior mandibular region for safe placement of dental implant

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Surgical and Radiologic Anatomy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The aim of this study was to examine the morphology of submandibular fossae at edentulous posterior regions of dried mandibles and to determine a safe range for proper lingual angulation during the placement of a dental implant in the posterior mandibular region, with a computerized tomographic scan study. Spiral computed tomographic images of 77 dry adult human mandibles were evaluated to determine the deepest area in the submandibular fossa. Then, the proper lingual angulations for the placement of a dental implant at these regions were measured. Pearson’s correlation coefficient was calculated to show the relation between the depths of submandibular fossa and lingual implant angulations. “Paired t test” was used for differences between the lingual implant angulations and the depths of submandibular fossa on each side of the mandibles. Depths of the submandibular fossa and lingual implant angulations were varied between 1.1 and 4.6 mm: 62°–84° on right side of the mandibles, and 1.1–4.5 mm, 65°–83° on left side of the mandibles. There were statistically medium negative correlations between the degree of lingual implant angulations and the depth of submandibular fossa on each side of the mandible (r = −0.44, p < 0.001, and r = −0.38, p = 0.001). There was a statistically significant difference between the right and left sides of the mandibles in terms of the depth of submandibular fossa (p = 0.01). Within the limits of this study, the depth of submandibular fossa was measured as ≥2 mm in around 71.5 % of examined regions, and lingual implant angulations were between 62° and 84°. These results may be considered by clinicians who are planning the dental implant placement in posterior mandible to avoid potential risk of lingual cortical plate perforation.

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
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Annibali S, Ripari M, La Monaca G, Tonoli F, Cristalli MP (2009) Local accidents in dental implant surgery: prevention and treatment. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 29:325–331

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Branemark PI (1983) Osseointegration and its experimental background. J Prosthet Dent 50:399–410

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Brenner DJ, Hall EJ (2007) Computed tomography—an increasing source of radiation exposure. N Engl J Med 357:2277–2284

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Chan HL, Benavides E, Yeh CY, Fu JH, Rudek IE, Wang HL (2011) Risk assessment of lingual plate perforation in posterior mandibular region: a virtual implant placement study using cone-beam computed tomography. J Periodontol 82(1):129–135

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Chen LC, Lundgren T, Hallstrom H, Cherel F (2008) Comparison of different methods of assessing alveolar ridge dimensions prior to dental implant placement. J Periodontol 79:401–405

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Dao TT, Mellor A (1998) Sensory disturbances associated with implant surgery. Int J Prosthodont 11:462–469

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. De Moraes MEL, Hollender LG, Chen CSK, Moraes LC, Balducci I (2011) Evaluating craniofacial asymmetry with digital cephalometric images and cone-beam computed tomography. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 139:e523–e531

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Flanagan D (2003) Important arterial supply of the mandible, control of an arterial hemorrhage, and report of a hemorrhagic incident. J Oral Implantol 29:165–173

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Froum S, Casanova L, Byrne S, Cho SC (2011) Risk assessment before extraction for immediate implant placement in the posterior mandible: a computerized tomographic scan study. J Periodontol 82(3):395–402

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Greenstein G, Cavallaro J, Tarnow D (2008) Practical application of anatomy for the dental implant surgeon. J Periodontol 79:1833–1846

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Harris D, Horner K, Gröndahl K, Jacobs R, Helmrot E, Benic GI, Bornstein MM, Dawood A, Quirynen M (2011) E.A.O. guidelines for the use of diagnostic imaging in implant dentistry 2011. A consensus workshop organized by the European Association for Osseointegration at the Medical University of Warsaw. Clin Oral Implants Res 23(11):1243–1253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Hanazawa T, Sano T, Seki K, Okano T (2004) Radiologic measurements of the mandible: a comparison between CT-reformatted and conventional tomographic images. Clin Oral Implants Res 15:226–232

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Isaacson TJ (2004) Sublingual hematoma formation during immediate implant placement of mandibular endosseous implants. J Am Dent Assoc 135:168–172

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Kalpidis CD, Setayesh RM (2004) Hemorrhaging associated with endosseous implant placement in the anterior mandible: a review of the literature. J Periodontol 75:631–645

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Leite GM, Lana JP, de Carvalho Machado V, Manzi FR, Souza PE, Horta MC (2013) Anatomic variations and lesions of the mandibular canal detected by cone beam computed tomography. Surg Radiol Anat (Epub ahead of print)

  16. Leong DJM, Chan HL, Yeh CY, Takarakis N, Fu JH, Wang HL (2011) Risk of lingual plate perforation during implant placement in the posterior mandible: a human cadaver study. Implant Dent 20(5):360–362

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Momin MA, Matsumoto K, Ejima K, Asaumi R, Kawai T, Arai Y, Honda K, Yosue T (2013) Correlation of mandibular impacted tooth and bone morphology determined by cone beam computed topography on a premise of third molar operation. Surg Radiol Anat 35:311–318

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Niamtu J 3rd (2001) Near-fatal airway obstruction after routine implant placement. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 92:597–600

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Parnia F, Fard EM, Mahboub F, Hafezeqoran A, Gavgani FE (2010) Tomographic volume evaluation of submandibular fossa in patients requiring dental implants. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 109:e32–e36

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Reilly DT, Burstein AH (1975) The elastic and ultimate properties of compact bone tissue. J Biomech 8:393–405

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Tyndall DA, Brooks SL (2000) Selection criteria for dental implant site imaging: a position paper of the American Academy of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 89:630–637

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. van Steenberghe D, Lekholm U, Bolender C, Folmer T, Henry P, Herrmann I, Higuchi K, Laney W, Linden U, Astrand P (1990) Applicability of osseointegrated oral implants in the rehabilitation of partial edentulism: a prospective multicenter study on 558 fixtures. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 5:272–281

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Watanabe H, Mohammad Abdul M, Kurabayashi T, Aoki H (2010) Mandible size and morphology determined with CT on a premise of dental implant operation. Surg Radiol Anat 32:343–349

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Anatomy, Faculty of Medicine, Gulhane Military Medical Academy, 06018, Etlik, Ankara, Turkey

    Selda Yildiz, Necdet Kocabiyik & Fatih Yazar

  2. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Gulhane Military Medical Academy, Etlik, Ankara, Turkey

    Gurkan Rasit Bayar

  3. Department of Radiology, Gulhane Military Medical Academy, Etlik, Ankara, Turkey

    Inanc Guvenc

  4. Department of Anatomy, Ankara University Faculty of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey

    Ayhan Cömert

Authors
  1. Selda Yildiz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Gurkan Rasit Bayar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Inanc Guvenc
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Necdet Kocabiyik
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Ayhan Cömert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Fatih Yazar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Selda Yildiz.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yildiz, S., Bayar, G.R., Guvenc, I. et al. Tomographic evaluation on bone morphology in posterior mandibular region for safe placement of dental implant. Surg Radiol Anat 37, 167–173 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00276-014-1351-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00276-014-1351-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation