|
 
 |
| ORIGINAL ARTICLE |
|
| Year : 2021 | Volume
: 9
| Issue : 1 | Page : 6-16 |
|
Can a panoramic radiograph predict the inferior alveolar nerve canal's position, or canal compression, near third molar root apices?
Peter D Cervenka1, Jason N Burkes1, Douglas D Steffy2
1 Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD, North Chicago, IL, USA
2 Captain James A. Lovell Federal Health Care Center, North Chicago, IL, USA
| Date of Submission | 27-Feb-2021 |
| Date of Decision | 20-Mar-2021 |
| Date of Acceptance | 23-Mar-2021 |
| Date of Web Publication | 20-May-2021 |
Correspondence Address:
Peter D Cervenka
Naval Medical Center Portsmouth, Naval Dental Clinic Norfolk, 1647 Admiral Taussig Blvd., BLDG. CD3, 2nd Flr, Room 260, Norfolk, VA 23511
USA
 Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None  | Check |
DOI: 10.4103/jomr.jomr_4_21
Background: Injury to the inferior alveolar nerve can occur during surgical removal of the mandibular third molars (M3Ms), resulting in numbness of the mandibular teeth, chin, and lower lip. This occurs when the roots of M3M compress the inferior alveolar canal (IAC) against the lingual cortical plate. Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) reveals the buccolingual relationship of the IAC and M3M, but the panoramic radiograph (PR) has not been evaluated to determine whether the plane film can reveal this relationship. Aims: The aim of the study is to determine whether PR could predict buccal or lingual IAC position or compression near M3M. Design: This retrospective study evaluated 200 M3M sites in 42 women and 67 men, aged 17–28 years. Ninety-one bilateral measurements were taken; 98 left and 102 right halves were analyzed. Methods: IAC position and degree of compression were interpreted from the CBCT. Utilizing imaging software, 13 different measurements were obtained. Statistical Analyses: Fisher's exact test, t-test, principal component analysis, and multivariate analysis were utilized. Results: Male and female canal positions significantly differed. Canal position was significantly different comparing partially erupted to erupted and fully bony impacted molars. Lingual canal position, versus buccal, was more frequently associated with moderate-to-severe IAC compression. “Anterior-posterior ramus at the occlusal plane” and “anterior ramus to anterior IAC at the occlusal plane” contributed most to the severity of IAC compression. Conclusion: The variables evaluated did not identify a significant relationship. A larger data set is needed to evaluate any role the dimension of the ramus has on IAC compression.
Keywords: Anatomy, computed tomography, digital imaging/radiology, imaging, oral and maxillofacial surgery, radiography
How to cite this article:
Cervenka PD, Burkes JN, Steffy DD. Can a panoramic radiograph predict the inferior alveolar nerve canal's position, or canal compression, near third molar root apices?. J Oral Maxillofac Radiol 2021;9:6-16 |
How to cite this URL:
Cervenka PD, Burkes JN, Steffy DD. Can a panoramic radiograph predict the inferior alveolar nerve canal's position, or canal compression, near third molar root apices?. J Oral Maxillofac Radiol [serial online] 2021 [cited 2023 Mar 25];9:6-16. Available from: https://www.joomr.org/text.asp?2021/9/1/6/316484 |
| Introduction | |  |
Appreciation of the inferior alveolar nerve canal (IAC) location and cortication status near third molar root apices is paramount in anticipation of increased risk for nerve injury.[1],[2],[3],[4] Panoramic radiography (PR) is the standard diagnostic screening modality for routine third molar surgery[5] but cannot distinguish the IAC buccal–lingual relationship to the mandibular third molar (M3Ms). The vertical tube shift[6] addresses this issue though not without limitations. The radiographic signs studied by Howe and Poynton[7] and popularized by Rood and Shehab[8] have increased our ability to identify cases with increased risk for nerve injury.[9],[10],[11],[12],[13],[14] Arguing questionable reliability of these indicators[15] prompts others to seek reassurance with three-dimensional visualization.[16] Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) reveals the IAC buccolingual relationship to the M3M[17],[18],[19] though its use is not associated with a decreased incidence of nerve injury, its value lies in predicting nerve exposure and the increased potential for nerve injury following removal of M3M.[9],[18],[20],[21],[22],[23],[24],[25] However, CBCT utilization is burdened by increased radiation exposure, added cost, and availability.
Background
Previous studies on IAC anatomy have evaluated the canal's vertical position,[26],[27] the relationship to nonthird molar root apices,[28] bi- and tri-furcated variations,[29],[30] buccal-lingual position variation with age, gender, and race,[31],[32] buccal-lingual position in relation to the ramus,[33] horizontal canal location,[17],[34],[35] and the canal's anterior-posterior ascent[36] and diameter[37],[38] along with characteristic variations of the mental foramen.[39],[40] In addition, the inferior alveolar neurovascular bundle anatomy has been studied extensively.[38],[41],[42]
Previous anatomical CBCT studies have characterized the buccal-lingual course of the mandibular canal as it traverses the ramus and mandibular body,[33] compared caliper determined canal measurements as they relate to CBCT derived measurements,[43] studied the canals relationship to mandibular tooth root apices, adjacent bone margins, the mental foramen, and the anterior loop of the canal,[44] and have cross compared cadaver and CBCT determined canal diameters for accuracy.[45] CBCT studies have also used 3D statistical models to deduce the canal's course,[46] the canal's course within the ramus of class III prognathism,[47] and the canal's relationship to premolars and molars.[48]
Furthermore, multiple studies have cross compared third molar IAC PR findings with CBCT analysis evaluating the canals position in relation to root darkening and loss of the IAC white line,[49] have identified loss of IAC cortication as cause for darkening of the roots,[50],[51]investigated radiographic findings associated with IAC cortical absence,[13],[52],[53] have determined the anatomic reliability of reconstructed volumetric computed tomographic panoramic images compared to conventional PR,[54] have evaluated the accuracy in determining the anatomical position of the M3M in relation to the IAC[9] and have identified risk factors associated with nerve injury.[9],[18],[24],[25],[53]
When the IAC is positioned lingual to the M3M with a change in canal shape (compression) and loss of the cortical canal margin, there is an increased risk for nerve exposure/transient or permanent nerve injury.[9],[18],[24],[25] The CBCT evaluation reveals the significance of PR findings perceived as IAC M3M root intimacy and has refined interpretation of the plane film.
To our knowledge, there has not been a study to determine whether mandibular dimensions could predict IAC position and shape. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether mandibular dimensions (distances, angles, and ratios) from a PR can predict IAC positioning and/or canal compression near third molar root apices.
| Methods | | |
This is a retrospective radiographic study of imaging from routine third molar (wisdom) teeth evaluations between July 2018 and March 2019. Due to the retrospective nature of this study, it was granted an exemption in writing by the institutional review boards at Hines VA (18-013) and the National Capital Consortium (896,402). PRs were obtained on a Planmeca Promax Panoramic machine; radiographs were reviewed using X-ray DCV viewer (Apteryx Imaging Inc., Akron, OH, USA). Patients whose radiographs displayed IAC and M3M intimacy [Figure 1] as evidenced by IAC superimposition in addition to darkening or deflection of the roots, deviation of the IAC, or loss of the canal's cortical margin underwent CBCT imaging (Kodak Carestream 9300C). Imaging that revealed paracoronal, or intrabony, pathosis or impacted, or missing, adjacent second molars was not included in the study. CBCT images were interpreted by an oral radiologist who, in conjunction with clinical findings, recorded third molar eruption status (erupted, partially erupted [PE], or full bony impaction), angulation (vertical, mesioangular, horizontal, or distoangular), IAC canal position (buccal or lingual to the M3M), and degree of compression (none, mild, moderate, or severe) [Figure 2]. Utilizing mandibular halves as study sites, at least 100 lingually and 100 buccally IAC positioned sites were collected. Only corresponding diagnostic radiographs were considered (visualization of the entire mandible, neutral posture, and aligned focal trough) for analysis. From the radiograph and dental record, the patient's age and gender were recorded, and images were then deidentified and uploaded into Dolphin Imaging software (Dolphin Imaging, Chatsworth, CA, USA). Radiographs were divided into two equal groups and then analyzed by separate investigators (PC and JB). Utilizing Dolphin's image measurement interface, calibration was performed based on the manufacture's panoramic digital sensor size (14 cm × 20 cm), and dimensional analysis was performed on the mandibular half of the respective M3M site. | Figure 1: A representative panoramic radiograph exhibiting bilateral inferior alveolar canal-third molar root intimacy
Click here to view |
 | Figure 2: Cone-beam computed tomographic coronal sections through M3M sites demonstrating mild (a), moderate (b), and severe (c) compression of the inferior alveolar canal. M3M: Mandibular third molar
Click here to view |
The measurements obtained were as follows [Figure 3]: (1) “anterior-posterior ramus at occlusal plane,” the distance, in millimeters (all measurements in millimeters unless otherwise noted), from anterior to posterior ramal cortex along a line extending posteriorly from the cusp tip of the mandibular second premolar/bicuspid to the distobuccal cusp tip of the mandibular second molar (hereafter referred to as occlusal plane.; (2) “anterior ramus to lingula” (in figures as AR to Ant IAC at Occ plane), the distance from the anterior ramal cortex to the anterior cortical margin of the lingula along the occlusal plane; (3) “posterior ramus to lingula” (in figures as PR to Post IAC at Occ Lane), the distance from the posterior ramal cortex to the posterior cortical margin of the lingula along the occlusal plane; (4) “sigmoid notch to lingula,” the distance from the inferior most portion of the sigmoid notch to the superior most cortical margin of the lingula; (5) “ramus to inferior border angle,” the angle, in degrees, formed by the intersection of a line drawn from the posterior most cortical margin of the condyle to the most inferior and posterior cortical margin of the ramus intersecting a line from the inferior most cortical margin of the mandibular body at the mental foramen to the most posterior and inferior cortical margin of the mandibular body at the angle; (6) “condyle to inferior border,” the distance from the most superior and posterior cortical margin of the condyle to the most inferior and posterior cortical margin of the mandibular angle; (7) “tooth height to mandibular body height,” the ratio, in decimal value, of the distance in millimeters from the distobuccal cusp tip, to the inferior most point of the distal root apex, of the second molar to the distance from the alveolar crest cortical margin of the interproximal bone between the first and second molar to the inferior most cortical margin of the mandibular body; (8) “IAC width at M3M” (in figures as Canal Width) the distance from the superior to the inferior cortical margins of the IAC along a line drawn from the distobuccal cusp tip, to the distal root apex, of the M3M; (9) “IAC height at the lingula,” the greatest vertical distance between the superior and inferior cortical margins of the IAC at the lingula; (10) “IAC to inferior border at second molar,” the distance from the inferior cortical margin of the IAC to the inferior-most cortical margin of the inferior border of the mandible, along a line drawn from the distobuccal cusp tip to the distal root apex of the second molar; (11) “IAC to inferior border at first molar,” the distance from the inferior cortical margin of the IAC to the inferior-most cortical margin of the inferior border of the mandible, along a line drawn from the distobuccal cusp tip to the distal root apex of the first molar; (12) “alveolar crest to superior mental foramen,” the distance from the cortical margin of the alveolar crest to the superior most cortical margin of the mental foramen along a line drawn perpendicular from the alveolar crest to the mental foramen; (13) “inferior border to inferior mental foramen,” the distance from the inferior most cortical margin of the inferior border of the mandible to the inferior most cortical margin of the mental foramen along a line drawn perpendicular from the inferior border of the mandible. These 13 measurements, along with patient and third molar demographics, were used as variables to determine if their values, or a combination thereof, related to IAC position and/or compression. | Figure 3: The 13 measurements obtained: (1) Anterior-posterior ramus at occlusal plane; (2) Anterior ramus to lingual; (3) Posterior ramus to lingula; (4) Sigmoid notch to lingula; (5) Ramus to inferior border angle; (6) Condyle to inferior border; (7) Tooth height to mandibular body height; (8) inferior alveolar canal width at M3M; (9) inferior alveolar canal height at the lingula; (10) inferior alveolar canal to inferior border at second molar; (11) inferior alveolar canal to inferior border at first molar; (12) Alveolar crest to superior mental foramen; (13) Inferior border to inferior mental foramen. M3M: Mandibular third molar
Click here to view |
Statistical analyses were carried out using Fisher's exact test and t-test. Individual measurements from the 13 variables were analyzed in RStudio (Boston, MA, USA), utilizing the packages readxl and psych.[55] The packages factoextra[56] and ropls[57] were utilized for principal component analysis (PCA) and multivariate analyses. The multivariate analyses were carried out with scaled numerical data excluding age, adding categorical variables as classifiers. Ggplot2[58] in RStudio and Graphpad Prism[59] were used for visualization of the plots.
| Results | | |
Radiographic images from 109 patients, 42 women and 67 men, aged 17–28 years were included in the study (mean age = 18.77); 70 patients were aged 18 years old. Ninety-two out of 109 patients had bilateral mandible measurements taken; 98 left (site #17) and 103 right (site #32) halves were analyzed, creating a matrix of 201 mandible measurements from 109 patients. CBCT analysis confirmed that 100 sites had buccal and 101 sites had lingual IAC position. Of these, female IAC positions were 34.32% buccal (n = 23) and 65.67% lingual (n = 44). In contrast, male IAC positions were 57.89% buccal (n = 77) and 42.11% lingual (n = 56) [Figure 4]. This difference in IAC position between the two genders was found to be significant (P = 0.0026, Fisher's exact test). | Figure 4: Gender and inferior alveolar canal position differences, as a percentage
Click here to view |
Of the 201 analysis sites, 45 molars were erupted (E), 149 were PE, and 7 were unerupted/full bony impacted. A total of 52 vertical, 88 mesio-angular, 15 disto-angular, and 46 horizontally positioned teeth were observed. There was no significant difference in eruption status based on gender (P = 0.7295, Fisher's exact test), age (P = 0.07781, Fisher's test), or tooth angulation (P = 0.09401). However, there was a significant difference in IAC position and tooth eruption status (P = 0.0001478, Fisher's exact test). Erupted and fully bony erupted molars were more frequent in the mandible measurements with a buccal IAC position (n = 38) compared to lingual (n = 14). Partially bony erupted molars were more frequent in the mandibles with a lingual IAC position (n = 86) than buccal (n = 62) [Figure 5]. Lingual IAC position was found to be more frequently associated with moderate-to-severe compression (n = 69) compared to a buccal IAC position (n = 19). This is in contrast to the molars with buccal IAC position (n = 81) having none-to-mild IAC compression than those with a lingual IAC position (n = 31) [Figure 6]. This association is statistically significant (P ≤ 2.2e-16, Fisher's exact test). The measurements obtained from the panoramic radiographs are summarized in [Table 1] and [Table 2]. | Figure 5: Inferior alveolar canal position and tooth eruption status. Erupted (E), full bony impacted, and partially erupted
Click here to view |
 | Figure 6: Degree of inferior alveolar canal compression and buccal-lingual position
Click here to view |
 | Table 1: Summary of measurements obtained from panoramic radiographs having inferior alveolar canals positioned buccal to the third molar
Click here to view |
 | Table 2: Summary of measurements obtained from panoramic radiographs having inferior alveolar canals positioned lingual to the third molar
Click here to view |
To address whether IAC position and degree of compression could be explained by the numerical measurements, PCA was carried out. Principal components (PCs) divide the multidimensional space into two vectors that best capture variance within the data. Unsupervised PCA was able to explain only 28.6% (PC1/dimension 1 [Dim1]) and 16.2% (PC2/dimension 2 [Dim2]) variance of the data [Figure 7]. For a dataset to show some degree of variability between different groups, you would expect either PC1 or PC2 to be above 40% and explain together up to 90% of dataset variability. | Figure 7: Principal component analysis. Dim1: Dimension 1, Dim2: Dimension 2, A. P.: Anterior: posterior, Occ: Occlusal, AR: Anterior ramus, Ant: Anterior, IAC: Inferior alveolar canal, PR: Posterior ramus, Post: Posterior, mandib: Mandibular, MF: Mental foramen, contrib: Contribution
Click here to view |
Most variables had a low contribution to either PC1/Dim1 or PC2/Dim2 components [Figure 8], with eight of the variables having 10%–30% contribution. Therefore, most numerical measurements could only explain a small portion of variance within the data. | Figure 8: A summary of the measurements with the greatest contribution to vectors (Dim: 1 and Dim: 2) capturing variance within the data. A.P.: Anterior: posterior, Occ: Occlusal, AR: anterior ramus, Ant: Anterior, IAC: Inferior alveolar canal, PR: Posterior ramus, Post: Posterior, mandib: Mandibular, MF: Mental foramen
Click here to view |
To rule out the contribution of individual variables that could explain IAC position or degree of compression, a supervised partial least squares discriminate analysis (PLS-DA) was performed. This assigned coordinates and divided the data set along the most promising vectors. However, no clear separation between buccal or lingual IAC position was observed and the PCs could only explain 24% of the variance combined [Figure 9]. Similarly, PLS-DA aimed at explaining IAC degree of compression did not find conclusive results and could only explain 39% variance (PC1 = 19%, PC2 = 20%) [Figure 10]. | Figure 9: Inferior alveolar canal position partial least squares discriminate analysis: supervised partial least squares discriminate analysis forcing separation into buccal (B) and lingual (I) directions
Click here to view |
 | Figure 10: Inferior alveolar canal degree of compression supervised partial least squares discriminate analysis forcing separation into none, mild, moderate, and severe
Click here to view |
The measurements “anterior-posterior ramus at occlusal plane” and “anterior ramus to lingula” were found to be the most promising variables explaining IAC degree of compression, contributing 59.13% [Figure 11] and 66.74% to PC1, respectively [Figure 12]. | Figure 11: Inferior alveolar canal degree of compression and the measurement “AP ramus Occ plane,” anterior-posterior ramus at the occlusal plane
Click here to view |
 | Figure 12: Inferior alveolar canal degree of compression and the measurement “AR-Ant inferior alveolar canal Occ Plane,” anterior ramus to the anterior margin inferior alveolar canal at the occlusal plane
Click here to view |
Plotting the values of “anterior-posterior ramus at occlusal plane” and “anterior ramus to lingula” revealed potential differences between none and severe IAC compression groups. T-test between buccal positioned IAC–none and lingual positioned IAC–severe compression groups did not reach significance value but does suggest a potential difference between the groups (P = 0.0548). T-test between the severe/none IAC compression groups was significant for the “anterior ramus to lingula” (P = 0.0029); however, the sample size was too small to establish a potential relationship (severe n = 29, none n = 30). In addition, no difference was found between other IAC compression groups (mild and moderate) and there seems to be no clear relationship between “anterior-posterior ramus at occlusal plane” and “anterior ramus to lingula” and IAC degree of compression.
To fully rule out any potential variables able to separate none/severe IAC compression groups, a cluster dendrogram (k = 2) was carried out using all numerical measurements [Figure 13] but was unable to classify them. | Figure 13: Cluster dendogram evaluating inferior alveolar canal compression groups: “None” and “severe” using all 13 measured variables
Click here to view |
Finally, we compared the measurements between left and right mandibular halves to establish potential anatomical differences between the sides. Measurements from 92 patients were used and revealed no significant linear differences between the anatomical sites [Figure 14]. | Figure 14: Comparing right (y) and left (x) sites (n = 92) across the 13 variables. (1) anterior-posterior ramus at occlusal plane; (2) anterior ramus to lingula; (3) posterior ramus to lingula; (4) sigmoid notch to lingula; (5) ramus to inferior border angle; (6) condyle to inferior border; (7) tooth height to mandibular body height; (8) inferior alveolar canal width at the M3M; (10) inferior alveolar canal to inferior border at second molar; (11) inferior alveolar canal to inferior border at first molar; (12) Alveolar crest to superior mental foramen; (13) Inferior border to inferior mental foramen. M3M: Mandibular third molar
Click here to view |
| Discussion | | |
The inherent distortion of PR imaging[60],[61] was deliberately accepted as a consistent and unavoidable variable in the study design. At times, our designated landmarks were not easily appreciated, and precision approximation had to be utilized. Our results show a significant difference in IAC positions between men and women which is supported more by previous findings[32],[62],[63],[64] than those opposing.[65] In contrast to males, females are more likely to have lingual, versus buccally positioned IACs in cases of M3M intimacy. The age group,[16],[17],[18],[19],[20],[21],[22],[23],[24],[25],[26],[27] though coinciding with average ages for M3M removal, might be viewed as a limiting for three reasons; first, vertical impactions (52 in this study) may migrate with age, changing the IAC relationship from lingual, or buccal, to inferior to the apices. Second, mesial impacted, buccally inclined, M3Ms could increase their inclination with age, changing the degree of IAC compression. Finally, if a M3M is retained until elderliness bone loss from disuse atrophy and age-related resorption could alter the IAC M3M relationship.[48]
Our study design prevented random evaluation of third molar sites regarding eruption status. Furthermore, of those erupted third molars, only those with insufficient arch length were included. We purposefully collected CBCT verified, near equal cases of lingual and buccal canal positioning with a disregard for other parameters. Had we collected equal numbers of erupted and unerupted M3M, in addition to buccal and lingual canal positions, interpretation of the relationship between eruption status and canal position would have been possible. Previous studies have shown that the IAC is more frequently found buccal to the M3M. Our results indicate that erupted teeth and buccal IAC position are significantly associated, but this may be a finding of disproportion resulting from clinical indicators (symptoms, decay, and insufficient arch length) prompting removal.
In support of previous studies, there were no differences between left and right anatomical analysis sites.[28] The distances “anterior-posterior ramus at occlusal plane” and “anterior ramus to lingula” between the IAC positioning groups – buccal, having no compression (n = 30) and lingually with severe compression (n = 27) – were 1.7 mm and 1.4 mm less, respectively. These contributed most to the severity of IAC compression; however, due to small sample sizes, further studies are needed to establish this significance. Interestingly, both measurements focus on the dimension of the ramus and encourage further investigation about this region.
An additional limitation of our findings includes the absence of interobserver agreement. Future studies should have a larger sample size, equally representing gender and third molar eruption status. Furthermore, to improve dimensional accuracy, CBCT recreated panoramic images should be evaluated.
This study was unable to identify a significant relationship in the measured mandibular variables that could predict the IAC position or degree of compression. The measurements “anterior-posterior ramus at occlusal plane” and “anterior ramus to lingula” were found to contribute most, but larger sample sizes are needed to establish this significance.
| Conclusion | | |
The variables evaluated did not reveal a relationship that could predict canal location. A larger data set is needed to evaluate any role the anterior-posterior ramus length has on the degree of IAC compression.
Disclaimer
The identification of specific products or scientific instrumentation is considered an integral part of the scientific endeavor and does not constitute endorsement or implied endorsement on the part of the author, DoD, or any component agency. The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy of the Department of Army/Navy/Air Force, Department of Defense, or U. S. Government.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Silvia Hnatova for her statistical analysis and interpretation of the data.
Financial support and sponsorship
Nil.
Conflicts of interest
There are no conflicts of interest.
| References | | |
| 1. | Tay AB, Go WS. Effect of exposed inferior alveolar neurovascular bundle during surgical removal of impacted lower third molars. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2004;62:592-600.  |
| 2. | Valmaseda-Castellón E, Berini-Aytés L, Gay-Escoda C. 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 2001;92:377-83. |
| 3. | Gülicher D, Gerlach KL. Sensory impairment of the lingual and inferior alveolar nerves following removal of impacted mandibular third molars. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2001;30:306-12. |
| 4. | 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;100:185-92. |
| 5. | Matzen LH, Wenzel A. Efficacy of CBCT for assessment of impacted mandibular third molars: A review-based on a hierarchical model of evidence. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2015;44:20140189. |
| 6. | Kositbowornchai S, Densiri-Aksorn W, Piumthanaroj P. Ability of two radiographic methods to identify the closeness between the mandibular third molar root and the inferior alveolar canal: A pilot study. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2010;39:79-84. |
| 7. | Howe G, Poynton HG. Prevention of damage to the inferior alveolar nerve during the evaluation of mandibular third molars. Br Dent J 1960;109:355-63. |
| 8. | 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. |
| 9. | 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. |
| 10. | Nakayama K, Nonoyama M, Takaki Y, Kagawa T, Yuasa K, Izumi K, et al. Assessment of the relationship between impacted mandibular third molars and inferior alveolar nerve with dental 3-dimensional computed tomography. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2009;67:2587-91. |
| 11. | Sedaghatfar M, August MA, Dodson TB. Panoramic radiographic findings as predictors of inferior alveolar nerve exposure following third molar extraction. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2005;63:3-7. |
| 12. | Su N, van Wijk A, Berkhout E, Sanderink G, De Lange J, Wang H, et al. Predictive value of panoramic radiography for injury of inferior alveolar nerve after mandibular third molar surgery. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2017;75:663-79. |
| 13. | Shahidi S, Zamiri B, Bronoosh P. Comparison of panoramic radiography with cone beam CT in predicting the relationship of the mandibular third molar roots to the alveolar canal. Imaging Sci Dent 2013;43:105-9. |
| 14. | 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. |
| 15. | Zandi M, Shokri A, Heidari A, Masoud Peykar E. Objectivity and reliability of panoramic radiographic signs of intimate relationship between impacted mandibular third molar and inferior alveolar nerve. Oral Maxillofac Surg 2015;19:43-8. |
| 16. | Suomalainen A, Ventä I, Mattila M, Turtola L, Vehmas T, Peltola JS. Reliability of CBCT and other radiographic methods in preoperative evaluation of lower third molars. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2010;109:276-84. |
| 17. | Miller CS, Nummikoski PV, Barnett DA, Langlais RP. 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;70:791-7. |
| 18. | 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. |
| 19. | 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. |
| 20. | Ghaeminia H, Gerlach NL, Hoppenreijs TJ, 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 Craniomaxillofac Surg 2015;43:2158-67. |
| 21. | Guerrero ME, Botetano R, Beltran J, Horner K, Jacobs R. 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 2014;18:335-42. |
| 22. | Guerrero ME, Nackaerts O, Beinsberger J, Horner K, Schoenaers J, Jacobs R, et al. 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 2012;70:2264-70. |
| 23. | Hutchinson SY. Cone beam computed tomography panoramic images vs. traditional panoramic radiographs. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2005;128:549-50. |
| 24. | Shiratori K, Nakamori K, Ueda M, Sonoda T, Dehari H. Assessment of the shape of the inferior alveolar canal as a marker for increased risk of injury to the inferior alveolar nerve at third molar surgery: A prospective study. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2013;71:2012-9. |
| 25. | Tachinami H, Tomihara K, Fujiwara K, Nakamori K, Noguchi M. Combined preoperative measurement of three inferior alveolar canal factors using computed tomography predicts the risk of inferior alveolar nerve injury during lower third molar extraction. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2017;46:1479-83. |
| 26. | Carter RB, Keen EN. The intramandibular course of the inferior alveolar nerve. J Anat 1971;108:433-40. |
| 27. | Denio D, Torabinejad M, Bakland LK. Anatomical relationship of the mandibular canal to its surrounding structures in mature mandibles. J Endod 1992;18:161-5. |
| 28. | Nortjé CJ, Farman AG, Grotepass FW. Variations in the normal anatomy of the inferior dental (mandibular) canal: A retrospective study of panoramic radiographs from 3612 routine dental patients. Br J Oral Surg 1977;15:55-63. |
| 29. | Grover PS, Lorton L. Bifid mandibular nerve as a possible cause of inadequate anesthesia in the mandible. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1983;41:177-9. |
| 30. | Wadhwani P, Mathur RM, Kohli M, Sahu R. Mandibular canal variant: A case report. J Oral Pathol Med 2008;37:122-4. |
| 31. | Levine MH, Goddard AL, Dodson TB. Inferior alveolar nerve canal position: A clinical and radiographic study. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2007;65:470-4. |
| 32. | Simonton JD, Azevedo B, Schindler WG, Hargreaves KM. Age- and gender-related differences in the position of the inferior alveolar nerve by using cone beam computed tomography. J Endod 2009;35:944-9. |
| 33. | Kim ST, Hu KS, Song WC, Kang MK, Park HD, Kim HJ. Location of the mandibular canal and the topography of its neurovascular structures. J Craniofac Surg 2009;20:936-9. |
| 34. | Obradović O, Todorovic L, Vitanovic V. Anatomical considerations relevant to implant procedures in the mandible. Bull Group Int Rech Sci Stomatol Odontol 1995;38:39-44. |
| 35. | Davis H. Mobilization of the Alveolar Nerve to Allow Placement of Osseointegratible Fixtures. Advanced Osseointegration Surgery. Application in the Maxillofacial Region. Chicago: Quintessence Publishing Co.; 2000. p. 129-41. |
| 36. | Anderson LC, Kosinski TF, Mentag PJ. A review of the intraosseous course of the nerves of the mandible. J Oral Implantol 1991;17:394-403. |
| 37. | Rajchel J, Ellis E 3 rd, Fonseca RJ. The anatomical location of the mandibular canal: Its relationship to the sagittal ramus osteotomy. Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg 1986;1:37-47. |
| 38. | Sato I, Ueno R, Kawai T, Yosue T. Rare courses of the mandibular canal in the molar regions of the human mandible: A cadaveric study. Okajimas Folia Anat Jpn 2005;82:95-101. |
| 39. | Mardinger O, Chaushu G, Arensburg B, Taicher S, Kaffe I. Anterior loop of the mental canal: An anatomical-radiologic study. Implant Dent 2000;9:120-5. |
| 40. | Uchida Y, Yamashita Y, Goto M, Hanihara T. Measurement of anterior loop length for the mandibular canal and diameter of the mandibular incisive canal to avoid nerve damage when installing endosseous implants in the interforaminal region. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2007;65:1772-9. |
| 41. | Olivier E. The inferior dental canal and its nerve in the adult. Br Dent J 1928;49:356-58. |
| 42. | Moriyama H, Shimada K, Itoh M, Takahashi T, Otsuka N. Morphometric analysis of the inferior alveolar nerve fails to demonstrate sexual dimorphism. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2007;65:1555-61. |
| 43. | Kamburog˘lu K, Kılıç C, Ázen T, Yüksel SP. Measurements of mandibular canal region obtained by conebeam computed tomography: A cadaveric study. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2009;107:e34-42. |
| 44. | Koivisto T, Chiona D, Milroy LL, McClanahan SB, Ahmad M, Bowles WR. Mandibular canal location: Cone-beam computed tomography examination. J Endod 2016;42:1018-21. |
| 45. | Gerlach NL, Ghaeminia H, Bronkhorst EM, Bergé SJ, Meijer GJ, Maal TJ. Accuracy of assessing the mandibular canal on cone-beam computed tomography: A validation study. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2014;72:666-71. |
| 46. | Zachow S, Lamecker H, Elsholtz B, Stiller M. Is the course of the inferior alveolar nerve deducible from the shape of the mandible? Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg 2016;1:1-5. |
| 47. | Tsuji Y, Muto T, Kawakami J, Takeda S. Computed tomographic analysis of the position and course of the mandibular canal: Relevance to the sagittal split ramus osteotomy. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2005;34:243-6. |
| 48. | Bürklein S, Grund C, Schäfer E. Relationship between root apices and the mandibular canal: A cone-beam computed tomographic analysis in a German population. J Endod 2015;41:1696-700. |
| 49. | 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. |
| 50. | Umar G, Obisesan O, Bryant C, Rood JP. Elimination of permanent injuries to the inferior alveolar nerve following surgical intervention of the “high risk” third molar. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2013;51:353-57. |
| 51. | Tantanapornkul W, Mavin D, Prapaiphittayakun J, Phipatboonyarat N, Julphantong W. Accuracy of panoramic radiograph in assessment of the relationship between mandibular canal and impacted third molars. Open Dent J 2016;10:322-9. |
| 52. | Rodriguez Y Baena R, Beltrami R, Tagliabo A, Rizzo S, Lupi SM. Differences between panoramic and cone beam-CT in the surgical evaluation of lower third molars. J Clin Exp Dent 2017;9:e259-65. |
| 53. | Neves FS, de Almeida SM, Bóscolo FN, Haiter-Neto F, Alves MC, Crusoé-Rebello I, et al. Risk assessment of inferior alveolar neurovascular bundle by multidetector computed tomography in extractions of third molars. Surg Radiol Anat 2012;34:619-24. |
| 54. | 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;60:979-84. |
| 55. | Revelle W. Procedures for Psychological, Psychometric, and Personality Research, R package v. 1.9.12. Evanston: Psych-Northwestern University; 2019. |
| 56. | |
| 57. | Thévenot EA, Roux A, Xu Y, Ezan E, Junot C. Analysis of the human adult urinary metabolome variations with age, body mass index, and gender by implementing a comprehensive workflow for univariate and OPLS statistical analyses. J Proteome Res 2015;14:3322-35. |
| 58. | Wickham H. Ggplot2. Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis. Houston: Springer International; 2016. |
| 59. | Motulsky H. The analysis, and Prism version number, GraphPad Prism version 8.0.0, www.graphpad.com GraphPad Software, San Diego, California USA 2019. |
| 60. | Björksved M, Magnuson A, Bazargani SM, Lindsten R, Bazargani F. Are panoramic radiographs good enough to render correct angle and sector position in palatally displaced canines? Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2019;155:380-7. |
| 61. | Suphangl S, Rattanabanlang A, Amornsettachai P, Wongsirichat N. Dimension distortion of digital panoramic radiograph on posterior mandibular regions. . Mahidol Dental Journal 2016;36:279-86. |
| 62. | Kawashima Y, Sakai O, Shosho D, Kaneda T, Gohel A. Proximity of the mandibular canal to teeth and cortical bone. J Endod 2016;42:221-4. |
| 63. | Dempf R, Hausamen JE. Lesions of the inferior alveolar nerve arising from endodontic treatment. Aust Endod J 2000;26:67-71. |
| 64. | Rowe AH. Damage to the inferior dental nerve during or following endodontic treatment. Br Dent J 1983;155:306-7. |
| 65. | Huang CY, Liao YF. Anatomical position of the mandibular canal in relation to the buccal cortical bone in Chinese patients with different dentofacial relationships. J Formos Med Assoc 2016;115:981-90. |
[Figure 1], [Figure 2], [Figure 3], [Figure 4], [Figure 5], [Figure 6], [Figure 7], [Figure 8], [Figure 9], [Figure 10], [Figure 11], [Figure 12], [Figure 13], [Figure 14]
[Table 1], [Table 2]
|
Search Pubmed for