Journal of the Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons

  • 제35권1호
  • /
  • Pages.26-30
  • /
  • 2009
  • /
  • 2234-7550(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2234-5930(eISSN)
대한구강악안면외과학회 (The Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons)
권호 표지

Cone-beam Computed Tomography Measurement of the Position of the Inferior Alveolar Nerve Canal in Mandibular Prognathism

  • Yun, Sung-Hun (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea) ;
  • Park, Ji-Young (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea) ;
  • Ko, Young-Kyung (Department of Periodontics, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea) ;
  • Park, Je-Uk (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea) ;
  • Pyo, Sung-Woon (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea)
  • 발행 : 2009.02.28
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

Background and Objectives: To determine the anatomic position of the inferior alveolar nerve (IAN) canal in patients with mandibular prognathism using the cone-beam CT (CBCT). Materials and Methods: Fifty rami from 25 patients were evaluated. The images were taken by i-CAT and reconstructed 3-dimensionally using the Simplant 11 program. The linear distances between the IAN canal to the buccal cortex (a, $a^{\dag}$ and $a^{\ddag}$), from the IAN canal to the alveolar crest (b and $b^{\dag}$) and the anterior margin ($b^{\ddag}$) and finally the buccal cortical thickness (c, $c^{\dag}$ and $c^{\ddag}$) were measured at three reference planes (VP, OP and HP). Results: On the left side, the average distance of a, b and c were 7.12, 15.96 and 3.60 mm on the VP plane, respectively. On the OP, the distance of $a^{\dag}$, $b^{\dag}$ and $c^{\dag}$ was 6.11, 8.83 and 2.63 mm. For the HP, the distance of $a^{\ddag}$, $b^{\ddag}$ and $c^{\ddag}$ was 4.84, 10.11 and 2.30 mm. On the right side, the distance of a, b and c, on the VP, was 7.10, 16.13 and 3.42 mm, respectively. On the OP, the distance of $a^{\dag}$, $b^{\dag}$ and $c^{\dag}$ was 4.77, 8.75 and 2.68 mm. On the HP, the distance of $a^{\dag}$, $b^{\dag}$ and $c^{\ddag}$ was 4.55, 9.84 and 2.38 mm. Regarding the difference between genders, the distance in male's was longer than female's on the VP (p=0.019), and was thicker in males than females on the HP (p=0.002). Conclusion: The CBCT data provided accurate information about the location and course of the IAN.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. MacIntosh RB. Experience with the sagittal osteotomy of the mandibular ramus: A 13-year review. J Maxillofac Surg. 1981;9:151-65 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-0503(81)80036-7
  2. Turvey TA. Intraoperative complications of sagittal osteotomy of the mandibular ramus: Incidence and management. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1985;43:504-9 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0278-2391(85)80028-8
  3. Acebal-Bianco F, Vuylsteke PL, Mommaerts MY, De Clercq CA. Perioperative complications in corrective facial orthopedic surgery: 5-year retrospective study. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2000;58:754-60 https://doi.org/10.1053/joms.2000.7874
  4. Westermark A, Bystedt H, von Konow L. Inferior alveolar nerve function after sagittal split osteotomy of the mandible: Correlation with degree of intraoperative nerve encounter and other variables in 496 operations. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1998;36:429-33 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0266-4356(98)90458-2
  5. Yoshida T, Nagamine T, Kobayashi T, Michimi N, Nakajima T, Sasakura H, Hanada K. Impairment of the inferior alveolar nerve after sagittal split osteotomy. J Cranio Maxillofac Surg. 1989;17:271-7 https://doi.org/10.1016/S1010-5182(89)80095-2
  6. Tamas F. Position of the mandibular canal. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1987;16:65-9 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0901-5027(87)80032-2
  7. Gowgiel JM. The position and course of the mandibular canal. J Oral Implantol. 1992;18:383-5
  8. Kim HJ, Lee HY, Chung IH, Cha IH, Yi CK. Mandibular anatomy related to sagittal split ramus osteotomy in Koreans. Yonsei Med J. 1997;38:19-25 https://doi.org/10.3349/ymj.1997.38.1.19
  9. Yamamoto R, Nakamura A, Ohno K, Michi K. Relationship of the mandibular canal to the lateral cortex of the mandibular ramus as a factor in the development of neurosensory disturbance after bilateral sagittal split osteotomy. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2002;60: 490-5 https://doi.org/10.1053/joms.2002.31843
  10. 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 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2004.06.001
  11. Arai Y, Tammisalo E, Iwai K, Hahimoto K, Shinoda K. Development of a compact computed tomographic apparatus for dental use. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 1999;28:245-8 https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.dmfr.4600448
  12. Nakajima A, Sameshima GT, Arai Y, Homme Y, Shimizu N, Dougherty H Sr. Two- and three-dimensional orthodontic imaging using limited cone beam-computed tomography. Angle Orthod. 2005;75:895-903
  13. Kobayashi K, Shimoda S, Nakagawa Y, Yamamoto A. Accuracy in measurement of distance using limited cone-beam computerized tomography. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2004;19:228- 31
  14. Honda K, Larheim TA, Johannessen S, Arai Y, Shinoda K, Westesson PL: Ortho cubic super-high resolution computed tomography; a new radiographic technique with application to the temporomandibular joint. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2001;91:239-43 https://doi.org/10.1067/moe.2001.111942
  15. Periago DR, Scarfe WC, Moshiri M, Scheetz JP, Silveira AM, Farman AG. Linear accuracy and reliability of cone beam CT derived 3-dimensional images constructed using an orthodontic volumetric rendering program. Angle Orthod. 2008;78:387-95 https://doi.org/10.2319/011707-24.1
  16. Han SY, Baik HS, Kim KD, Yu HS. Facial soft tissue measuring analysis of normal occlusion using three-dimensional CT imaging. Korean J Orthod. 2005;35:409-19
  17. Ludlow JB, Davies-Ludlow LE, Brooks SL, Howerton WB. Dosimetry of 3 CBCT devices for oral and maxillofacial radiology: CB Mercuray, NewTom 3G and i-CAT. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2006;35:219-26 https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr/14340323
  18. Lee ET, Kim GT, Choi YS, Hwang EH. Radiation absorbed dose of cone beam computed tomography. Kor J Oral Maxillofac Radiol. 2007;37:87-92
  19. Rajchel J. Ellis III E, Fonseca RJ. The anatomical location of the mandibular canal: Its relationship to the sagittal ramus osteotomy. Int J Adult Orthod Orthognath Surg. 1986;1:37-47
  20. Levine MH, Goddard AL, Dodson TB. Inferior alveolar nerve position: a clinical and radiographic study. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2007;65:470-4 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2006.05.056
  21. Ha SsY, Song NK, Koh KJ. A Computerized Tomographic Study on the Location of the Mandibular Canal and the Cortical Thickness of the Mandible. Kor J Oral Maxillofac Radiol. 1997;27:217-30
  22. Carter TB, Frost DE, Tucker MR, Zuniga JR. Cortical thickness in human mandibles: clinical relevance to the sagittal split ramus osteotomy. Int J Adult Orthod Orthognath Surg. 1991;6:257-60
  23. Ylikontiola L, Moberg K, Huumonen S, Soikkonen K, Oikarinen K. Comparison of three radiographic methods used to locate the mandibular canal in the buccolingual direction before bilateral sagittal split osteotomy. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2002;93:736-42 https://doi.org/10.1067/moe.2002.122639
  24. Pyo SW, Kung DH. Cortical thickness measurement of mandibular retromolar area using computerized tomography. Kor J Oral Maxillofac Implantol. 2006;10:32-40