Advertisement

Preoperative Anatomic Evaluation of the Relationship Between Inferior Alveolar Nerve Canal and Impacted Mandibular Third Molar in a Population of Bhubaneswar, Odisha, Using CBCT: A Hospital-Based Study

  • Rajat Mohanty
  • Purnendu Rout
  • Vaibhav SinghEmail author
Original Article
  • 1 Downloads

Abstract

Purpose

To evaluate the correlation between the position of inferior alveolar nerve canal and the angulation of impacted mandibular third molars using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) in a hospital-based study in the state of Odisha, India.

Materials and Methodology

Three hundred cases of impacted third molars in 200 patients (154 males; 46 females) were included in the study, for whom an initial periapical or panoramic radiograph had revealed that the mandibular canal and the lower third molars were in close proximity. A CBCT scan of each patient was carried out to assess how the canal position influenced the class and position of impaction, angulation of impaction and bone contact.

Results

Class II position B impactions were found in 78.37% cases where the position of ID canal was approximate to the lingual plate and inferior to third molar (73.75%). The results were statistically significant (p = 0.00). 80% of the ID canals showed bone contact. Of these 73.75% ID canals showed lingual bone contact. Mesioangular impactions were most common in mandible and significantly associated with lingual and inferior positioning of the canal.

Conclusions

The study mostly exhibited patients having mesioangular class II position B third molar impactions of the mandible. The position of the canal has a significant influence on the type of impaction and the bone contact.

Keywords

Inferior alveolar nerve canal Impactions Third molars CBCT 

Notes

Acknowledgement

The study was supported by Department of Oral Medicine and Radiology, Kalinga Institute of Dental Sciences, KIIT University, Bhubaneswar, India.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

All authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Gu L, Zhu C, Chen K, Liu X, Tang Z (2017) Anatomic study of the position of the mandibular canal and corresponding mandibular third molar on cone-beam computed tomography images. Surg Radiol Anat 40(6):609–614CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bui CH, Seldin EB, Dodson TB (2003) Types, frequencies, and risk factors for complications after third molar extraction. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 61(12):1379–1389CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cheung LK, Leung YY, Chow LK, Wong MC, Chan EK, Fok YH (2010) Incidence of neurosensory deficits and recovery after lower third molar surgery: a prospective clinical study of 4338 cases. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 39(4):320–326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Valmaseda-Castellón E, Berini-Aytés L, Gay-Escoda C (2001) Inferior alveolar nerve damage after lower third molar surgical extraction: a prospective study of 1117 surgical extractions. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 92(4):377–383CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Smith AC, Barry SE, Chiong AY, Hadzakis D, Kha SL, Mok SC, Sable DL (1997) Inferior alveolar nerve damage following removal of mandibular third molar teeth: a prospective study using panoramic radiography. Aust Dent J 42(3):149–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Maegawa H, Sano K, Kitagawa Y, Ogasawara T, Miyauchi K, Sekine J, Inokuchi T (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(5):639–646CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Monaco G, Montevecchi M, Bonetti GA, Gatto MR, Checchi L (2004) Reliability of panoramic radiography in evaluating the topographic relationship between the mandibular canal and impacted third molars. J Am Dent Assoc 135(3):312–318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    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 3(1):3–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Al-Salehi SK, Horner K (2016) Impact of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) on diagnostic thinking in endodontics of posterior teeth: a before- after study. J Dent 53:57–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pohlenz P, Blessmann M, Blake F, Heinrich S, Schmelzle R, Heiland M (2007) Clinical indications and perspectives for intraoperative cone-beam computed tomography in oral and maxillofacial surgery. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 103(3):412–417CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hasegawa T, Ri S, Shigeta T, Akashi M, Imai Y, Kakei Y, Shibuya Y, Komori T (2013) Risk factors associated with inferior alveolar nerve injury after extraction of the mandibular third molar—a comparative study of preoperative images by panoramic radiography and computed tomography. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 42:843–851CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kim JW, Cha IH, Kim SJ, Kim MR (2012) Which risk factors are associated with neurosensory deficits of inferior alveolar nerve after mandibular third molar extraction? J Oral Maxillofac Surg 70:2508–2514CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Nakayama K, Nonoyama M, Takaki Y, Kagawa T, Yuasa K, Izumi K, Ozeki S, Ikebe T (2009) Assessment of the relationship between impacted mandibular third molars and inferior alveolar nerve with dental 3-dimensional computed tomography. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 67:2587–2591CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Eyrich G, Seifert B, Matthews F, Matthiessen U, Heusser CK, Kruse AL, Obwegeser JA, Lübbers HT (2011) 3-Dimensional imaging for lower third molars: is there an implication for surgical removal? J Oral Maxillofac Surg 69(7):1867–1872CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    De Melo Albert DG, Gomes AC, Do Egito Vasconcelos BC, De Oliveira e Silva ED, Holanda GZ (2006) Comparison of orthopantomographs and conventional tomography image for assessing the relationship between impacted lower third molars and mandibular canal. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 64:1030–1037CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Flygare L, Ohman A (2008) Preoperative imaging procedures for lower wisdom teeth removal. Clin Oral Investig 12:291–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Tantanapornkul W, Okouchi K, Fujiwara Y, Yamashiro M, Maruoka Y, Ohbayashi N, Kurabayashi T (2007) A comparative study of cone-beam computed tomography in assessing the topographic relationship between the mandibular canal and impacted third molars. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 103:253–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Shujaat S, Abouelkheir HM, Al-Khalifa KS, Al-Jandan B, Marei HF (2014) Pre-operative assessment of relationship between inferior dental nerve canal and mandibular impacted third molar in Saudi population. Saud Dent J 26(3):103–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Jhamb A, Dolas RS, Pandilwar PK, Mohanty S (2009) 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 67(1):58–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kim HG, Lee JH (2014) Analysis and evaluation of relative positions of mandibular third molar and mandibular canal impacts. J Kor Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg 40(6):278–284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Maegawa H, Sano K, Kitgawa Y, Ogasawara T, Miyauchi K, Sekine J, Inokuchi T (2003) Preoperative assessment of the relationship between the mandibular third molar and mandibular canal by axial computed tomography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 96:639–646CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Miller CS, Nummikoski PV, Barnett DA, Langlais RP (1990) Cross sectional tomography: a diagnostic technique for determining the buccolingual relationship of the impacted mandibular third molars and the inferior alveolar neurovascular bundle. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 70:791–797CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Quirinode Almeida Barros R, Bezerrade Melo N, de Macedo Bernardino Í, Arêa Leão Lopes Araújo Arruda MJ, Meira Bento P (2018) Association between impacted third molars and position of the mandibular canal: a morphological analysis using cone-beam computed tomography. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 56(10):952–955CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Chen Y, Liu J, Pei J et al (2018) The risk factors that can increase possibility of mandibular canal wall damage in adult: a cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) study in a Chinese population. Med Sci Monit 24:26–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Maglione M, Costantinides F, Bazzocchi G (2015) Classification of impacted mandibular third molars on cone-beam CT images. J Clin Exp Dent 7:e224–e231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Hassan AH (2010) Pattern of third molar impaction in Saudi population. Clin Cosmet Investig Dent 2:109–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Syed KB, Kota Z, Ibrahim M, Bagi MA, Assiri MA (2012) Prevalence of impacted molar teeth among Saudi population in Asir region, Saudi Arabia – a retrospective study of 3 years. J Int Oral Health 5:43–47Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Quek SL, Tay CK, Tay KH, Toh SL, Lim KC (2003) Pattern of third molar impaction in a Singapore Chinese population: a retrospective radiographic survey. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 32:548–552CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Ghaeminia H, Gerlach NL, Hoppenreijs TJM, Kicken M, Dings JP, Borstlap WA, de Haan T, Bergé SJ, Meijer GJ, Maal TJ (2015) Clinical relevance of cone beam computed tomography in mandibular third molar removal: a multicentre, randomised, controlled trial. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 43:2158–2167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Ghaeminia H, Meijer GJ, Soehardi A, Borstlap WA, Mulder J, Vlijmen OJC, Bergé SJ, Maal TJJ (2011) The use of cone beam CT for the removal of wisdom teeth changes the surgical approach compared with panoramic radiography: a pilot study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 40:834–839CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Guerrero ME, Botetano R, Beltran J, Horner K, Jacobs R (2014) Can preoperative imaging help to predict postoperative outcome after wisdom tooth removal? A randomized controlled trial using panoramic radiography versus cone-beam CT. Clin Oral Investig 18:335–342CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Guerrero ME, Nackaerts O, Beinsberger J, Horner K, Schoenaers J, Jacobs R (2012) Inferior alveolar nerve sensory disturbance after impacted mandibular third molar evaluation using cone beam computed tomography and panoramic radiography: a pilot study. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 70:2264–2270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Yabroudi Feras, Sindet-Pedersen Steen (2012) Cone Beam Tomography (CBCT) as a diagnostic tool to assess the relationship between the inferior alveolar nerve and roots of mandibular wisdom teeth. Smile Dent J 7(3):12–17Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons of India 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Oral and Maxillofacial SurgeryKalinga Institute of Dental SciencesBhubaneswarIndia
  2. 2.Department of Oral Medicine and RadiologyKalinga Institute of Dental SciencesBhubaneswarIndia
  3. 3.Narayana Superspeciality HospitalKolkataIndia

Personalised recommendations