Radiological study of impacted third mandibular molars in relationship with mylohyoid canal: a case report

Authors

  • Fernández et al

Keywords:

Diagnostic imaging, impacted tooth, cone bema computed tomography

Abstract

The aim of this study was to present a case report through which to demonstrate cone beam computed tomography advantages in impacted mandibular third molars presurgical study. A case of 47-year-old man with a semi/impacted mandibular third molar for surgical removal was reported. Cone beam computed tomography study was made with Promax-3D plus unit. Obteined images were observed and analized by Romexis software 4.4.0.R. In obliques views, third molar presence in very deep and lingual position was verified. Inferior alveolar canal was visualized as a hypodense ovoidal region surrounded by a continuous hyperdense halo and separated from root tooth  by 2.80 mm. 3D reconstruction allowed to visualize an intimate contiguous relationship with mylohyoid canal. Impacted mandibular third molar extraction  is a commonly performed procedure in dental practice thereby dento-maxillo-facial surgeon must analyze all anatomical details of radiological images. In complex cases, specific studies such as CBCT, which turned out to be the gold standard for pre-surgical diagnosis and planning, should be requested and thus avoid complications that can occur in these surgeries. New and current evidence-based recommendations advocate that cone beam computed tomography study should be performed only when 2D radiological techniques do not provide surgeon with sufficient and accurate information and not as a routine protocol before mandibular third molars surgical removal.

References

1. Kumar VR, Yadav P, Kahsu E, Girkar F, Chakraborty R. Prevalence and Pattern of Mandibular Third Molar Impaction in Eritrean Population: A Retrospective Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2017; 18(2):100-106.

2. Passi D, Singh G, Dutta S, Srivastava D, Chandra L, Mishra S, Srivastava A, Dubey M. Study of pattern and prevalence of mandibular impacted third molar among Delhi-National Capital Region population with newer proposed classification of mandibular impacted third molar: A retrospective study. Natl J Maxillofac Surg 2019; 10:59-67.

3. Smailienė D, Trakinienė G, Beinorienė A, Tutlienė U. Relationship between the Position of Impacted Third Molars and External Root Resorption of Adjacent Second Molars: A Retrospective CBCT Study. Medicina (Kaunas) 2019; 55(6):305.

4. Wang D, He X, Wang Y, Li Z, Zhu Y, Sun C, Cheng J. External root resorption of the second molar associated with mesially and horizontally impacted mandibular third molar: evidence from cone beam computed tomography. Clinical Oral Investigations 2016; 21(4): 1335–1342.

5. Matzen LH, Schropp L, Spin-Neto R, Wenzel A. Radiographic signs of pathology determining removal of an impacted mandibular third molar assessed in a panoramic image or CBCT. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2017; 46: 20160330.

6. Sarıca İ, Derindağ G, Kurtuldu E, Naralan ME, Çağlayan F. A retrospective study: Do all impacted teeth cause pathology? Niger J Clin Pract 2019; 22:527-533.

7. Sanmatí-Garcia G, Valmaseda-Castellón E, Gay-Escoda C. Does Computed tomography prevent inferior alveolar nerve injuries caused by lower third molar removal? J Oral Maxilloffac Surg 2012; 70: 5-11.

8. Guerrero ME, Botetano R, Beltran J, Horner K, Jacobs R. Can preoperative imaging help to predict postoperative outcome after wisdoms tooth removal? A randomized controlled trial using panoramic radiography versus cone-beam CT. Clin Oral Investig 2014; 18: 335-342.

9. Matzen LH, Petersen LB, Wenzel A. Radiographic methods used before removal of mandibular third molars among randomly selected general dental clinics. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2016; 45: 20150226

10. Gu L, Zhu C, Chen K, Liu X, Tang Z. Anatomic study of the position of the mandibular canal and corresponding mandibular third molar on cone-beam computed tomography images. Surgical and Radiologic Anatomy 2017; 40(6): 609–614.

11. Saha N, Kedarnath NS, Singh M. Orthopantomography and cone-beam computed tomography for the relation of inferior alveolar nerve to the impacted mandibular third molars. Ann Maxillofac Surg 2019; 9: 4-9.

12. Brown J, Jacobs R, Levring Jaghagen E, Lindh C, Baksi G, Schulze D et al. Basic training requirements for the use of dental CBCT by dentists: a position paper prepared by the European Academy of DentoMaxilloFacial Radiology. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2014; 43: 20130291.

13. Fernández JE. Foramen mentoniano accesorio: presentación de un caso y revisión de la literatura. Rev Arg de Anat Clin 2016; 8(3): 151-156.

14. Horner K, Islam M, Flygare L, Tsiklakis K, Whaites E. Basic principles for use of dental cone beam computed tomography: consensus guidelines of the European Academy of Dental and Maxillofacial Radiology. Dentomaxillofacial Radiology 2009; 38(4): 187–195.

15. Kim IH, Singer SR, Mupparapu M. Review of cone beam computed tomography guidelines in North America. Quitessence Int 2019; 50(2):136-145.

16. Scarfe WC, Christos Angelopoulos C. Maxillofacial Cone Beam Computed Tomography: Principles, Techniques and Clinical Applications. Ed. Springer International Publishing. Cham, Switzerland. 2018.

17. Manor Y, Abir R, Manor A, Kaffe I. Are different imaging methods affecting the treatment decision of extractions of mandibular third molars? Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2017; 46: 20160233.

18. Petersen LB, Vaeth M, Wenzel A. Neurosensoric disturbances after surgical removal of the mandibular third molar based on either panoramic imaging or cone beam CT scanning: A randomized controlled trial (RCT). Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2016; 45: 20150224.

19. Korkmaz YT, Kayıpmaz S, Senel FC, Atasoy KT, Gumrukcu Z. Does additional cone beam computed tomography decrease the risk of inferior alveolar nerve injury in high-risk cases undergoing third molar surgery? Does CBCT decrease the risk of IAN injury? International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery 2017; 46(5): 628–635.

20. Marciani RD. Third Molar Removal: An Overview of Indications, Imaging, Evaluation and Assessment of Risk. Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Clinics of North America 2007; 19(1): 1–13.

21. Dongol A, Sagtani A, Jaisani MR, Singh A, Shrestha A, Pradhan A, Pradhan L. Dentigerous Cystic Changes in the Follicles Associated with Radiographically Normal Impacted Mandibular Third Molars. International Journal of Dentistry 2018; 1–5.

22. Stathopoulos P, Mezitis M, Kappatos C, Titsinides S, Stylogianni E. Cysts and Tumors Associated With Impacted Third Molars: Is Prophylactic Removal Justified? Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surg 2011; 69(2): 405–408.

23. National Institute of Health (NIH) Consensus Development Conference on Removal of Third Molars. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1980. 38:235.

24. Petersen LB, Olsen KR, Matzen LH, Vaeth M, Wenzel A. Economic and health implications of routine CBCT examination before surgical removal of the mandibular third molar in the Danish population. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2015; 44: 20140406

25. Clé-Ovejero A, Sánchez-Torres A, Camps-Font O, Gay-Escoda C, Figueiredo R, Valmaseda-Castellón E. Does 3-dimensional imaging of the third molar reduce the risk of experiencing inferior alveolar nerve injury owing to extraction? The Journal of the American Dental Association 2017; 148(8): 575–583.

Published

2020-08-21