Maxillofacial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery

  • Volume 39
  • /
  • Pages.30.1-30.7
  • /
  • 2017
  • /
  • 2288-8101(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2288-8586(eISSN)
Korean Association of Maxillofacial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons (대한악안면성형재건외과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Evaluation of mandibular lingula and foramen location using 3-dimensional mandible models reconstructed by cone-beam computed tomography

  • Zhou, Cong (School of Stomatology, Stomatological Hospital of Shandong University) ;
  • Jeon, Tae-Hyun (Division of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, Department of Dentistry, Korea University Anam Hospital) ;
  • Jun, Sang-Ho (Division of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, Department of Dentistry, Korea University Anam Hospital) ;
  • Kwon, Jong-Jin (Korea University)
  • Received : 2017.07.18
  • Accepted : 2017.09.05
  • Published : 2017.12.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Background: The positions of the mandibular lingula and foramen have been set as indexes for inferior alveolar nerve (IAN) block and ramus osteotomies in orthognathic surgery. This study aimed to evaluate the anatomical structures of mandibular ramus, especially the mandibular lingula and foramen, by analyzing the cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) data of young adults. Methods: We evaluated 121 sides of hemi-mandibular CBCT model of 106 patients (51 male and 55 female patients; 18 to 36 years old). All the measurements were performed using the 2- and 3-dimensional rulers of $OnDemand3D^{(R)}$ software. Results: Statistical analysis of the data revealed that there was no significant difference in the mandibular angle between the genders. The mandibular lingula was found to be located at the center of ramus in males, but a little posterior in relation to the center in females. The mandibular lingula was rarely located below the occlusal plane; however, the position of the mandibular foramen was more variable (84.3% below, 12.4% above, and 3.3% at the level of the occlusal plane). Conclusions: The results of this study provide a valuable guideline for IAN block anesthesia and orthognathic surgery. CBCT can be considered effective and accurate in evaluating the fine structures of the mandible.

Keywords

References

  1. Goldberg S, Reader A, Drum M, Nusstein J, Beck M (2008) Comparison of the anesthetic efficacy of the conventional inferior alveolar, Gow-Gates, and Vazirani-Akinosi techniques. J Endod 34:1306-1311 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2008.07.025
  2. Ezoddini Ardakani F, Bahrololoumi Z, Zangouie Booshehri M, Navab Azam A, Ayatollahi F (2010) The position of lingula as an index for inferior alveolar nerve block injection in 7-11-year-old children. J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects 4(2):47-51 https://doi.org/10.5681/joddd.2010.013
  3. Cvetko E (2014) Bilateral anomalous high position of the mandibular foramen: a case report. Surg Radiol Anat 36(6):613-616 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00276-013-1209-y
  4. Archer WH (1975) Oral and maxillofacial surgery, vol 2. WB Saunders, Philadelphia, pp 1448-1449
  5. Monnazzi MS, Passeri LA, Gabrielli MF, Bolini PD, de Carvalho WR, da Costa Machado H (2012) Anatomic study of the mandibular foramen, lingula and antilingula in dry mandibles, and its statistical relationship between the true lingula and the antilingula. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 41(1):74-78 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2011.08.009
  6. Yu IH, Wong YK (2008) Evaluation of mandibular anatomy related to sagittal split ramus osteotomy using 3-dimensional computed tomography scan images. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 37(6):521-528 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2008.03.003
  7. Noleto JW, Marchiori E, Da Silveira HM (2010) Evaluation of mandibular ramus morphology using computed tomography in patients with mandibular prognathism and retrognathia: relevance to the sagittal split ramus osteotomy. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 68(8):1788-1794 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2009.12.028
  8. Smith BR, Rajchel JL, Waite DE, Read L (1991) Mandibular ramus anatomy as it relates to the medial osteotomy of the sagittal split ramus osteotomy. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 49(2):112-116 https://doi.org/10.1016/0278-2391(91)90095-4
  9. Kositbowornchai S, Siritapetawee M, Damrongrungruang T, Khongkankong W, Chatrchaiwiwatana S, Khamanarong K, Chanthaooplee T (2007) Shape of the lingula and its localization by panoramic radiograph versus dry mandibular measurement. Surg Radiol Anat 29(8):689-694 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00276-007-0270-9
  10. Clark DE, Danforth RA, Barnes RW, Burtch ML (1990) Radiation absorbed from dental implant radiography: a comparison of linear tomography, CT scan, and panoramic and intra-oral techniques. J Oral Implantol 16(3):156-164
  11. Mish CE (2007) Contemporary implant dentistry, 3rd edn. Publisher: Elsevier Health Sciences, pp 38-67
  12. Kau CH, Richmond S, Palomo JM, Hans MG (2005) Three-dimensional cone beam computerized tomography in orthodontics. J Orthod 32(4):282-293 https://doi.org/10.1179/146531205225021285
  13. Razavi T, Palmer RM, Davies J, Wilson R, Palmer PJ (2010) Accuracy of measuring the cortical bone thickness adjacent to dental implants using cone beam computed tomography. Clin Oral Implants Res 21(7):718-725 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2009.01905.x
  14. Ozaki Y, Watanabe H, Nomura Y, Honda E, Sumi Y, Kurabayashi T (2013) Location dependency of the spatial resolution of cone beam computed tomography for dental use. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 116(5):648-655 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oooo.2013.07.009
  15. Jun SH, Kim CH, Ahn JS, Padwa BL, Kwon JJ (2013) Anatomical differences in lower third molars visualized by 2D and 3D X-ray imaging: clinical outcomes after extraction. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 42(4):489-496 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2012.12.005
  16. Matherne RP, Angelopoulos C, Kulild JC, Tira D (2008) Use of cone-beam computed tomography to identify root canal systems in vitro. J Endod 34(1):87-89 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2007.10.016
  17. De Vos W, Casselman J, Swennen GR (2009) Cone-beam computerized tomography (CBCT) imaging of the oral and maxillofacial region: a systematic review of the literature. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 38(6):609-625 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2009.02.028
  18. Hatcher DC (2012) Cone beam computed tomography: craniofacial and airway analysis. Dent Clin N Am 56(2):343-357 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cden.2012.02.002
  19. Shin HS, Hwang SJ (2002) Study on the relationship of the inferior alveolar nerve position between buccal and lingual side using CT and orthpantomogram. J Korean Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg 28(1):1-6
  20. Yun SH, Park JY, Ko YK, Park JU, Pyo SW (2009) Cone-beam computed tomography measurement of the position of the inferior alveolar Nerve Canal in Mandibular Prognathism. J Korean Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg 35(1):26-30
  21. Kim HW, Kwon KH, Min SK, Oh SH, Chee YD, Koh SW, Ohn BH (2009) The study on course of the inferior Alveolar Canal in the Mandibular Ramus using Conebeam CT. J Korean Assoc Maxillofac Plast Reconstr Surg 31(5):386-393
  22. Kim JK, Gu H, An JS, Kook MS, Park HJ, Oh HK, Cho JH (2006) The study by using the computerized tomography imaging in order to access to mandibular foramen while inferior alveolar nerve anesthesia. J Korean Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg 32(6):566-574
  23. Kim HG, Yoon JH (1982) A study of the anteroposterior positional and radiographical measurement of the mandibular foramen of the Korean adult. J Korean Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg 8(1):137-145
  24. Cho IG, Chung JY, Lee JW, Yang JD, Chung HY, Cho BC, Choi KY (2014) Anatomical study of the mandibular angle and body in wide mandibular angle cases. Aesthet Plast Surg 38(5):933-940 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-014-0370-y
  25. Hetson G, Share J, Frommer J, Kronman JH (1988) Statistical evaluation of the position of the mandibular foramen. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 65(1):32-34 https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-4220(88)90187-9
  26. Pirgousis P, Brown D, Fernandes R (2013) Digital measurements of 120 mandibular angles to determine the ideal fibula wedge osteotomy to recreate the mandibular angle for microvascular reconstruction. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 71(12):2169-2175 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2013.05.005
  27. Muto T, Shigeo K, Yamamoto K, Kawakami J (2003) Computed tomography morphology of the mandibular ramus in prognathism: effect on the medial osteotomy of the sagittal split ramus osteotomy. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 61(1):89-93 https://doi.org/10.1053/joms.2003.50014
  28. Nicholson ML (1985) A study of the position of the mandibular foramen in the adult human mandible. Anat Rec 212(1):110-112 https://doi.org/10.1002/ar.1092120116
  29. Hayward J, Richardson ER, Malhotra SK (1977) The mandibular foramen: its anteroposterior position. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 44(6):837-843 https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-4220(77)90027-5
  30. Mbajiorgu EF (2000) A study of the position of the mandibular foramen in adult black Zimbabwean mandibles. Cent Afr J Med 46(7):184-190

Cited by

  1. Anatomical position of the mandibular canal in relation to the buccal cortical bone: relevance to sagittal split osteotomy vol.44, pp.4, 2018, https://doi.org/10.5125/jkaoms.2018.44.4.167
  2. Imaging study on relationship between the location of lingula and the Gonial angle in a Chinese population vol.41, pp.4, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00276-019-02195-x
  3. CBCT study on the relationship between lingula and antilingula position in a Chinese Han population vol.41, pp.6, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00276-019-02224-9
  4. The mandibular plane: a stable reference to localize the mandibular foramen, even during growth vol.36, pp.1, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-019-00381-6
  5. Quantitative Morphometric Analysis of Anatomical Landmarks Involved in Bilateral Sagittal Split Osteotomy in Different Skeletal Malocclusions Using Cone-Beam Computed Tomography vol.32, pp.6, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1097/scs.0000000000007354
  6. Correlation between the Mandibular Lingula Position and Some Anatomical Landmarks in Cone Beam CT vol.9, pp.12, 2017, https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare9121747