The Journal of the Korean dental association (대한치과의사협회지)

The Korean Dental Association (대한치과의사협회)
권호 표지

Assessment of mandibular incisive canal using cone-beam computed tomography in Korean population

콘빔 CT를 이용한 한국인의 하악 절치관 평가

  • Cho, Bong-Hae (Department of Imaging dentistry, School of Dentistry, Pusan National University) ;
  • Jung, Yun-Hoa (Department of Imaging dentistry, School of Dentistry, Pusan National University)
  • 조봉혜 (부산대학교 치의학전문대학원 영상치의학교실) ;
  • 정연화 (부산대학교 치의학전문대학원 영상치의학교실)
  • Received : 2015.10.19
  • Accepted : 2015.11.12
  • Published : 2015.12.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: This study was performed to investigate the characteristics of mandibular incisive canal (MIC) in Korean population. Materials and methods: A total of 97 subjects (60 males and 37 females) who underwent cone-beam computed tomography were included in the study. The anatomic features of MIC was assessed according to gender. Length, diameter and distance to inferior, lingual and buccal border were measured at the origin and the terminal. Also the distribution of MIC at each tooth position was evaluated. Results: Of 97 patients included, 75(77.3%) presented bilateral MIC and 13(13.4%) presented unilateral MIC. Of 194 hamimandibles, MIC was detected in 102(85%) sites in male and 61(82.4%) sites in female. Gender and side showed no statistically significant differences in detectability. The length, diameter and distance to adjacent structures were bigger in male than in female except the distance to lingual border. MIC travelled anteriorly in a slightly downward and lingual direction and usually terminated between the first premolar and the canine. On cross-sectional view, MIC showed individually scattered distribution both buccolingually and superoinferiorly. Conclusion: MIC is well detected with cone-beam computed tomography. Considered that the length and the location of MIC has large variations between individuals, its localization using cone-beam CT is highly recommended before performing surgical procedures such as implant placement and bone harvesting.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

Supported by : 부산대학교치과병원

References

  1. De Andrade E, Otomo-Corgel J, Pucher J, Ranganath KA, St George N Jr. The intraosseous course of the mandibular incisive nerve in the mandibular symphysis. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2001;21(6):591-597.
  2. Xu Y, Suo N, Tian X, Li F, Zhong G, Liu X, Bao Y, Song T, Tian H. Anatomic study on mental canal and incisive nerve canal in interforaminal region in Chinese population. Surg Radiol Anat. 2015;37(6):585-589 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00276-014-1402-7
  3. Mardinger O, Chaushu G, Arensburg B, Taicher S, Kaffe I. Anatomic and radiologic course of the mandibular incisive canal. Surg Radiol Anat. 2000;22(3-4):157-161. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00276-000-0157-5
  4. Mraiwa N, Jacobs R, Moerman P, Lambrichts I, van Steenberghe D, Quirynen M. Presence and course of the incisive canal in the human mandibular interforaminal region, two-dimensional imaging versus anatomical observations. Surg Radiol Anat. 2003;25(5-6):416-423 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00276-003-0152-8
  5. Obradovic O, Todorovic L, Pesic V, Pejkovic B, Vitanovic V. Morphometric analysis of mandibular canal: clinical aspects. Bull Group Int Rech Sci Stomatol Odontol. 1993;36(3-4):109-113.
  6. Raitz R, Shimura E, Chilvarquer I, Fenyo-Pereira M. Assessment of the mandibular incisive canal by panoramic radiograph and cone-beam computed tomography. Int.J Dent.2014;2014:187085.(EPub)
  7. Pires CA, Bissada NF, Becker JJ, Kanawati A, Landers MA. Mandibular incisive canal, cone beam computed tomography. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2012 ;14(1):67-73. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8208.2009.00228.x
  8. Jalili MR, Esmaeelinejad M, Bayat M, Aghdasi MM. Appearance of anatomical structures of mandible on panoramic radiographs in Iranian population. Acta Odontologica Scandinavica. 2012;70(5):384-389 https://doi.org/10.3109/00016357.2011.629625
  9. Romanos GE, Papadimitriou DE, Royer K, Stefanova-Stephens N, Salwan R, Malmstr?m H, Caton JG. The presence of the mandibular incisive canal: a panoramic radiographic examination. Implant Dent. 2012;21(3):202-206. https://doi.org/10.1097/ID.0b013e31824bc4c4
  10. Jacobs R, Mraiwa N, Van Steenberghe D, Sanderink G, Quirynen M. Appearance of the mandibular incisive canal on panoramic radiographs. Surg Radiol Anat. 2004;26(4):329-333 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00276-004-0242-2
  11. Leite GM, Lana JP, de Carvalho Machado V, Manzi FR, Souza PE, Horta MC. Anatomic variations and lesions of the mandibular canal detected by cone beam computed tomography. Surg Radiol Anat. 2014;36(8):795-804 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00276-013-1247-5
  12. Sahman H, Sekerci AE, Sisman Y, Payveren M. Assessment of the visibility and characteristics of the mandibular incisive canal : conebeam computed tomography versus panoramic radiography. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2014 ;29(1):71-78. https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.3304
  13. Huang H, Liu P, Li X, Pei Z, Yang X, Bai S, Huang Y. Mandibular incisive canal by cone beam CT. Hua Xi Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2013 ;31(5):479-482.
  14. Rosa MB, Sotto-Maior BS, Machado Vde C, Francischone CE. Retrospective study of the anterior loop of the inferior alveolar nerve and the incisive canal using cone beam computed tomography. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2013 ;28(2):388-392 https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.2648
  15. Apostolakis D, Brown JE. The dimensions of the mandibular incisive canal and its spatial relationship to various anatomical landmarks of the mandible: a study using cone beam computed tomography. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2013 ;28(1):117-124 https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.2372
  16. Makris N, Stamatakis H, Syriopoulos K, Tsiklakis K, van der Stelt PF. Evaluation of the visibility and the course of the mandibular incisive canal and the lingual foramen using cone-beam computed tomography. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2010;21(7):766-771 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2009.01903.x
  17. 김지혁, 김세호, 권광준, 김성민, 박영욱. 하악정중 부에서 자가골 채취시 절치관의 해부학적인 변이 에 대한 평가 . 대한구강악안면외과학회지 2006;32(3):226-229
  18. Raghoebar GM, Louwerse C, Kalk WW, Vissink A. Morbidity of chin bone harvesting. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2001;12(5):503-507. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.2001.120511.x
  19. Wismeijer D,van Waas MA, Vermeeren JI, Kalk W. Patients'perception of sensory disturbances of the mental nerve before and after implant surgery: a prospective study of 110 patients. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1997;35(4):254-259. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0266-4356(97)90043-7
  20. Kohavi D, Bar-Ziv J. Atypical incisive nerve: clinical report. Implant Dent. 1996 ;5(4):281-283. https://doi.org/10.1097/00008505-199600540-00007
  21. Parnia F, Moslehifard E, Hafezeqoran A, Mahboub F, Mojaver-Kahnamoui H. Characteristics of anatomical landmarks in the mandibular interforaminal region: a cone-beam computed tomography study. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2012;17(3):e420-425.
  22. Al-Ani O, Nambiar P, Ha KO, Ngeow WC. Safe zone for bone harvesting from the interforaminal region of the mandible. Clin. Oral Impl. Res. 2013;24 Suppl A100:115-121 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02393.x
  23. Sokhn S, Nasseh I, Noujeim M. Using cone beam computed tomography to determine safe regions for implant placement. Gen Dent. 2011;59(2):e72-77.
  24. Pommer B, Tepper G, Gahleitner A, Zechner W, Watzek G. New safety margins for chin bone harvesting based on the course of the mandibular incisive canal in CT. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2008;19(12):1312-1 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2008.01590.x