Cone Beam CT Evaluation of the Prevalence and Characteristics of the Retromolar Canal

Document Type : Original Article(s)

Authors

1 Assistant Professor, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, School of Dentistry, Shiraz University of Medial Science, Shiraz, Iran

2 Professor, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, School of Dentistry, Shiraz University of Medial Science, Shiraz, Iran

3 Undergraduate Student, Student Research Committee, School of Dentistry, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran

Abstract

Statement of problem: Retro-molar canal (RMC) is of clinical significance because of its neurovascular content, which may be at risk of damage during the surgical procedures of the area.Objectives: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the frequency and anatomic characteristics of RMC by using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). Materials and Methods: The sample of this study consisted of 500 CBCT images (1000 sides), evaluated for the presence, type, and width of RMC. The canals were categorized into five groups based on their course as A1 (vertical), A2 (vertical with a horizontal branch), B1 (curved), B2 (curved with a horizontal branch), and C (horizontal).Results: The study showed that 57 (11.4%) subjects and 67 (6.7%) sides had RMC in which 47 (9.4 %) were unilateral and 10 (2%) were bilateral. There was no statistically significant difference between male and female individuals in the occurrence of RMC (10.2% and 12.7%, respectively) (P-value=0.387). The most common morphologic types were B1 (50.7%) and A1 (23.9%), while A2 (3%) and B2 (4.5%) were the least frequent types. The mean width of the mandibular canal and RMC were 3.51 ± 0.55 mm and 1.30 ± 0.47 mm, respectively. These dimensions were not significantly influenced by gender (P-value=0.440, 0.569, respectively).Conclusions: The results of the present investigation showed that the RMC was a common anatomic structure. Therefore, because of its clinical significance, it is highly recommended that dental practitioners consider this structure in pre-surgical evaluations of the region in order to avoid related complications. 

References

  1. Murlimanju BV, Prakash KG, Samiullah D, et al. Accessory neurovascular foramina on the lingual surface of mandible: incidence, topography, and clinical implications. Indian J Dent Res. 2012; 23: 433.
  2. Patil S, Matsuda Y, Nakajima K, et al. Retromolar canals as observed on cone-beam computed tomography: their incidence, course, and characteristics. Oral Surg oral Med oral Mathol and oral Radiol. 2013; 115: 692-9.
  3. Muinelo-Lorenzo J, Suarez-Quintanilla JA, Fernandez-Alonso A, et al. Descriptive study of the bifid mandibular canals and retromolar foramina: cone beam CT vs panoramic radiography. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2014; 43: 20140090.
  4. Orhan K, Aksoy S, Bilecenoglu B, et al. Evaluation of bifid mandibular canals with cone-beam computed tomography in a Turkish adult population: a retrospective study. Surg Radiol Anat. 2011; 33: 501-7.
  5. Kawai T, Asaumi R, Sato I, et al. Observation of the retromolar foramen and canal of the mandible: a CBCT and macroscopic study. Oral Radiol. 2012; 28: 10-4.
  6. von Arx T, Hänni A, Sendi P, et al. Radiographic study of the mandibular retromolar canal: an anatomic structure with clinical importance. J Endod. 2011;37:1630-5.
  7. Bilecenoglu B, Tuncer N. Clinical and anatomical study of retromolar foramen and canal. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2006; 64: 1493-7.
  8. Schejtman R, Devoto FC, Arias NH. The origin and distribution of the elements of the human mandibular retromolar canal. Arch Oral Biol. 1967; 12: 1261-8.
  9. Silva FM, Cortez AL, Moreira RW, et al. Complications of intraoral donor site for bone grafting prior to implant placement. Implant Dent. 2006; 15: 420-6.
  10. Han SS, Hwang YS. Cone beam CT findings of retromolar canals in a Korean population. Surg Radiol Anat. 2014; 36: 871-6.
  11. Galdames IS, Matamala DZ, Lopez MC, et al.Retromolar Canal and Forame prevalence in dried mandibles and clinical implications. Int J Odontostomat. 2008; 2: 183-7.
  12. Lizio G, Pelliccioni GA, Ghigi G, et al. Radiographic assessment of the mandibular retromolar canal using cone-beam computed tomography. Acta Odontol Scand. 2013; 71: 650-5.
  13. Ossenberg NS. Retromolar foramen of the human mandible. Am J phys Anthropol. 1987; 73: 119-28.
  14. Narayana K, Nayak UA, Ahmed WN, et al. The retromolar foramen and canal in South Indian dry mandibles. Eur J Anat. 2002; 6: 141-6.
  15. Priya R, Manjunath KY, Balasubramanyam. Retromolar foramen. Indian J Dent Res. 2005; 16: 15-6.
  16. Tiwari S, Ramakrishna R, Sangeeta M. A study on the incidence of retromolar foramen in South Indian adult dried human mandibles and its clinical relevance. Int J Res Med Sci. 2015; 3: 1383-7.
  17. Rossi AC, Freire AR, Prado GB, et al. Incidence of retromolar foramen in human mandibles: ethnic and clinical aspects. Int J Morphol. 2012; 30: 1074-8.
  18. Sisman Y, Ercan-Sekerci A, Payveren-Arıkan M, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of cone-beam CT compared with panoramic images in predicting retromolar canal during extraction of impacted mandibular third molars. Med oral Patol oral y Cir Bucal. 2015;20: e74-e81.
  19. Pyle M, Jasinevicius T, Lalumandier J, et al. Prevalence and implications of accessory retromolar foramina in clinical dentistry. Gen Dent. 1999; 47:500-3.
  20. Kuribayashi A, Watanabe H, Imaizumi A, et al. Bifid mandibular canals: cone beam computed tomography evaluation. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2010; 39: 235-9.
  21. Kodera H, Hashimoto I. A case of mandibular retromolar canal: elements of nerves and arteries in this canal. Kaibogaku Zasshi. 1995; 70: 23-30.
Journal of Dental Biomaterials
Volume 4, Issue 4 - Serial Number 4
32
December 2017
Pages 461-467

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics