EVALUATION OF THE MANDIBULAR CANAL COURSE IN SOUTHEAST SERBIAN POPULATION – A CONE BEAM COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY STUDY

Evaluation of the mandibular canal course

Keywords: Mandible, mandibular canal, anatomical variation, CBCT.

Abstract


Introduction: Oral surgical interventions in the mandibular region require detailed knowledge of the position and course of the mandibular canal. The aim of this study was to determine the most common course of mandibular canal on cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) images in the population of Southeast Serbia.

Material and methods: 194 mandibular canals on CBCT images of 97 patients (48 male and 49 female) aged 18-65 years were analyzed in study. According to Worthington, courses of mandibular canals are classified into catenary, descending and straight. The obtained results were analyzed in relation to the gender and the age of the patients as well as to the left and right side of the mandible.

Results: The most common course of mandibular canal on the analyzed images was catenary (41.2%), then straight (37.1%) while the least was descending (21.6%). The most common type in males was the catenary (46.9%), while the straight type was the most common in females (39.6%). Statistical analysis showed no significant difference in the distribution of the mandibular canal course in relation to the gender and age of the patients and the side of the mandible.

Conclusion: The observed variations emphasize the importance of careful individual preoperative analysis of CBCT images of each patient as well as planning of different treatment modalities in the region of the mandible.

References

1. Asghar A, Priya A, Ravi KS et al. An evaluation of mandibular canal variations: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Anat Sci Int 2023;98(2):176–84.
2. Valenzuela-Fuenzalida JJ, Cariseo C, Gold M et al. Anatomical variations of the mandibular canal and their clinical implications in dental practice: a literature review. Surg Radiol Anat 2021;43(8):1259–72.
3. Alghamdi HS, Jansen JA. The development and future of dental implants. Dent Mater J 2020;39(2):167–72.
4. Zahedi S, Mostafavi M, Lotfirikan N. Anatomic Study of Mandibular Posterior Teeth Using Cone-beam Computed Tomography for Endodontic Surgery. J Endod 2018;44(5):738–43.
5. Jacobs R, Salmon B, Codari M et al. Cone beam computed tomography in implant dentistry: recommendations for clinical use. BMC Oral Health 2018;18(1):88.
6. Kovisto T, Ahmad M, Bowles WR. Proximity of the Mandibular Canal to the Tooth Apex. J Endod 2011;37(3):311–5.
7. Kawashima Y, Sakai O, Shosho D et al. Proximity of the Mandibular Canal to Teeth and Cortical Bone. J Endod 2016;42(2):221–4.
8. Worthington P. Injury to the inferior alveolar nerve during implant placement: a formula for protection of the patient and clinician. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2004;19(5):731–4.
9. Razi T, Emamverdizadeh P, Nilavar N et al. Comparison of the Hounsfield Unit in CT scan with the Gray Level in cone-beam CT. J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects 2019;13(3):177–82.
10. Jung YH, Cho BH. Radiographic evaluation of the course and visibility of the mandibular canal. Imaging Sci Dent 2014;44(4):273.
11. Ozturk A, Potluri A, Vieira AR. Position and course of the mandibular canal in skulls. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 2012;113(4):453–8.
12. Liu T, Xia B, Gu Z. Inferior alveolar canal course: a radiographic study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2009;20(11):1212–8.
13. Okiriamu A, Butt F, Opondo F et al. Morphology and Variant Anatomy of the Mandibular Canal in a Kenyan Population: A Cone-Beam Computed Tomography Study. Craniomaxillofac Res Innov 2023;8:275284642311827.
14. Almahdi HM, Alabdrabulridha Z, AlAbbas J et al. Permanent First Mandibular Molar: Loss Prevalence and Pattern among Saudis in Al-Ahsa. Eur J Dent 2023;17(03):840–4.
15. Mirbeigi S, Kazemipoor M, Khojastepour L. Evaluation of the Course of the Inferior Alveolar Canal: The First CBCT Study in an Iranian Population. Pol J Radiol 2016;81:338–41.
16. Jesudas PC, Seelam M, Santhosh Kumar MP. Assessment of Relation and Course of Inferior Alveolar Nerve Using CBCT-A Retrospective Study of 120 Cases. Int J Dent Oral Sci 2021;4320–5.
17. Mangla R, Singh N, Dua V et al. Evaluation of mandibular morphology in different facial types. Contemp Clin Dent 2011;2(3):200.
18. Lvovsky A, Bachrach S, Kim HC et al. Relationship between Root Apices and the Mandibular Canal: A Cone-beam Computed Tomographic Comparison of 3 Populations. J Endod 2018;44(4):555–8.
19. Tabinda H. Characteristics Of The Mental Foramen In Different Populations. Internet J Biol Anthropol 2011;4(2):1–7.
20. Vieira CL, Veloso SAR, Lopes FF. Location of the course of the mandibular canal, anterior loop and accessory mental foramen through cone-beam computed tomography. Surg Radiol Anat 2018;40(12):1411–7.
21. Čanković D, Čanković M, Ukropina S et al. Association of health determinants and depressive symptoms with tooth loss in the Serbian adult population: A cross-sectional study. Vojnosanit Pregl 2019;76(10):985–97.
Published
2025/11/19
Section
Originalni rad / Original article