Journal of Isfahan Dental School

Comparison of Diagnostic Value of Indicators of Mandibular Third Molar Root Position Relative to Inferior Alveolar Canal in Panoramic Radiography and Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT)

Document Type : مقاله‌های پژوهشی

Authors

1 Assistant Professor, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, School of Dentistry, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

2 Associate Professor, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, School of Dentistry, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

3 Postgraduate Student of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran

4 Postgraduate Student of Endodontics, Dental Research Center, School of Dentistry, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

Abstract

Introduction: Although using panoramic images of the third impacted molars and assessing their proximity to mandibular canal, this technique has limitations such as two-dimensional nature and magnifications occurred which calls to use a three-dimensional radiographic modalities such as CBCT. This study compared the location of the mandibular third molar’s roots regarding the inferior alveolar canal using panoramic radiography and CBCT techniques.
Materials and Methods: In a descriptive-analytical trial, 103 radiographic images of the patients’ impacted mandibular third molars were selected from the archives of Radiology Department of Tehran Dental School and assessed by means of panoramic and CBCT techniques. Three oral & maxillofacial radiologists assessed the positions of the mandibular third molars’ roots regarding the inferior alveolar canal in the panoramic and CBCT images at 2 time intervals. The assessments were repeated for next 2 weeks again. And then they were done on CBCT images. Frequency and percent of panoramic signs indicating the proximity of the mandibular third molars regarding buccal, lingual and medial positions of the teeth were obtained among the observers and 2 time intervals and the results were statistically analyzed by chi-square test. Significance level was considered to be 0.05 (p value = 0.05).
Results: Of total 103 impacted mandibular third molars, 56 (54.4%) had lingual location, 25 (24.3%) had medial location and 22 (21.3%) shoed buccal locations of the roots towards mandibular canal. (p value < 0.002)
The frequency of the root deflections (p value < 0.003), diversion of canals (p value < 0.03), narrowings of the roots (p value < 0.005), interruption of the borders (p value < 0.006) and narrowing of the canals (p value < 0.04) were higher in the buccal positions of the third molar roots towards the mandibular canal compared to other positions. The differences were statisticaly significant in some cases. However, the frequency of darkening of the roots (p value < 0.04) was higher in the lingual positions of the third molars than other positions. The agreements of the obervers was acceptable when assessing the images regarding indices of the proximity of third molars’ roots and mandibular canal.
Conclusion: Then, CBCT technique is a valuable tool to assess the location of the mandibular impacted third molars regarding the inferior alveolar canal. Using CBCT images of impacted third molars, the risk of damage to the alveolar nerve can be reduced. 
Keywords: Panoramic radiography, Mandibular canal, Cone Beam Computed Tomography, Impacted mandibular third molars

1. Bataineh AB. Sensory nerve impairment following mandibular third molar surgery. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2001; 59(9): 1012-7.
2. Hillerup S. Iatrogenic injury to oral branches of the trigeminal nerve: Records of 449 cases. Clin Oral Investig 2007; 11(2): 133-42.
3. Cheung LK, Leung YY, Chow LK. Incidence of neurosensory deficits and recovery after lower third molar surgery: A prospective clinical study of 4338 cases. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2010; 39(4): 320-6.
4. Lopes V, Mumenya R, Feinmann C, Harris M. Third molar surgery: An audit of the indications for surgery, post-operative complaints and patient satisfaction. Br J Oral MaxillofacSurg 1995; 33(1): 33-5.
5. Blondeau F, Daniel NG. Extraction of impacted mandibular third molars: Postoperative complications and their risk factors. J Can Dent Assoc 2007; 73(4): 325-9.
6. Blackburn CW, Bramley PA. Lingual nerve damage associated with the removal of lower third molars. Br Dent J 1989; 167: 103-7.
7. Tay AB, Go WS. Effect of exposed inferior alveolar neurovascular bundle during surgical removal of impacted lower third molars. J Oral MaxillofacSurg 2004; 62(5): 592-600.
8. Blaeser BF, August MA, Donoff RB, Kaban LB, Dodson TB. Panoramic radiographic risk factors for IAN injury after third molar extraction. J Oral MaxillofacSurg 2003; 61(4): 417-21.
9. Howe GL, Poyton HG. Prevention of damage to the inferior dental nerve during the extraction of mandibular third molars. Br Dent J 1960; 109: 353-63.
10. Kipp DP, Goldstein BH, Weiss WW Jr. Dysesthesia after mandibular third molar surgery: a retrospective study and analysis of 1,377 surgical procedures. J Am Dent Assoc 1980; 100(2): 185-92.
11. Lindh C, Petersson A, Klinge B, Nilsson M. Trabecular bone volume and bone mineral density in the mandible. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1997; 26(2): 101-6.
12. Monaco G, Montevecchi M, Bonetti GA, Gatto MRA, Checchi L. Reliability of panoramic radiographic in evaluating the topographic relationship between the mandibular canal and impacted third molars. J Am Dent Assoc 2004; 135(3): 312-8.
13. Ludlow JB, Davies-Ludlow LE, Brooks SL, Howerton WB. Dosimetry of 3 CBCT devices for oral and maxillofacial radiology: CB Mercuray. NewTom 3G and i-CAT. DentomaxillofacRadiol 2006; 35(4): 219-26.
14. Araki K, Maki K, Seki K, Sakamaki K, Harata Y, Sakaino R, Okano T, Seo K. Characteristics of a newly developed dentomaxillofacial X-ray cone beam CT scanner: system configuration and physical properties. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2004; 33(1): 51-9.
15. Loubele M, Guerrero ME, Jacobs R, Suetens P, van Steenberghe D. Comparison of jaw dimensional and quality assessments of bone characteristics with cone-beam CT, spiral tomography and multi-slice spiral CT. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2007; 22(3): 446-54.
16. Hashimoto K, Kawashima S, Kameoka S, Akiyama Y, Honjoya T, Ejima K, Sawada K. Comparison of image validity between cone beam computed tomography for dental use and multi-detector row helical computed tomography. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2007; 36(8): 465-71.
17. Sedaghatfar M, August MA, Dodson TB. Panoramic radiographic findings as predictors of inferior alveolar nerve exposure following third molar extraction. J Oral MaxillofacSurg 2005; 63(1): 3-7.
18. Atieh MA. Diagnostic accuracy of panoramic radiography in determining relationship between inferior alveolar nerve and mandibular third molar. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2010; 68(1): 74-82.
19. Pawelzik J, Cohnen M, Willers R, Becker J. A comparison of conventional panoramic radiographs with volumetric computed tomography images in the preoperative assessment of impacted mandibular third molars. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2002; 60(9): 979-84.
20. Tantanapornkul W, Okouchi K, Fujiwara Y. 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 2007; 103(2): 253-9.
21. Ghaeminia H, Meijer GJ, Soehardi A. 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(9): 964-71.
22. Gu L, Zhu C, Chen K, Liu X, Tang Z. Anatomic study of the position of the mandibular canal and corresponding mandibular third molar on cone-beam computed tomography images. Surg Radiol Anat 2018; 40(6): 609-14.
23. Ghai S, Choudhury S. Role of panoramic imaging and cone beam CT for assessment of inferior alveolar nerve exposure and subsequent paresthesia following removal of impacted mandibular third molar. J Maxillofac Oral Surg 2017; 17(2): 1-6.
24. Ghaeminia H, Gerlach NL, HoppenreijsTh, Kicken M, Dings JP, Borstlap WA, et al. Clinical relevance of cone beam computed tomography in mandibular third molar removal: A multicentre, randomised, controlled trial. J Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surg 2015; 43(10): e2158-e2167.
25. Chu YG, Park YI, Kim JW, Lee SH. Positional relationship of the mandibular canal and impact third molars by using dental cone beam computed tomography. J Korean Assoc Maxillofac Plast Reconstr Surg 2009; 31(6): 492-8.
26. Morant RD, Eleazer PD, Scheetz JP, Farman AG. Array-projection and depth discrimination with tuned aperture computed tomography for assessing the relationship between tooth roots and the inferior alveolar canal. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2001; 91(2): 252-9.
27. Ishak MH, Zhun OC, Shaari R, Rahman SA, Hasan MN, Alam MK. Panoramic radiography in evaluating the relationship of mandibular canal and impacted third molars in comparison with cone-beam computed tomography. Mymensingh Med J 2014; 23(4): 781-6.
28. Winstanley KL, Otway LM, Thompson L, Brook ZH, King N, Koong B, et al. Inferior alveolar nerve injury: Correlation between indicators of risk on panoramic radiographs and the incidence of tooth and mandibular canal contact on cone-beam computed tomo-graphy scans in a Western Australian population. J Investig Clin Dent 2018; 9(3): e12323.
29. Deshpande P, Guledgud MV, Patil K. Proximity of impacted mandibular third molars to the inferior alveolar canal and its radio-graphic predictors: a panoramic radiographic study. J Maxillofac Oral Surg 2013; 12(2): 145-51.
30. Hasani A, Ahmadi Moshtaghin F, Roohi P, Rakhshan V. Diagnostic value of cone beam computed tomography and panoramic radiography in predicting mandibular nerve exposure during third molar surgery. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2017; 46(2): 230-5.
31. Loubele M, Maes F, Jacobs R, van Steenberghe D, White SC, Suetens P. Comparative study of image quality for MSCT and CBCT scanners for dentomaxillofacial radiology applications. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 2008; 129(1-3): 222-6.
Journal of Isfahan Dental School
Volume 16, Issue 4 - Serial Number 4
January 2021
Pages 373-390