Kıvanç Kamburoğlu1, Buket Acar2, Selcen Yüksel3, Candan Semra Paksoy4. 1. Department of Dentomaxillofacial Radiology, Faculty of Dentistry, Ankara University, Ankara, Turkey. dtkivo@yahoo.com. 2. Department of Periodontology, Faculty of Dentistry, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey. 3. Department of Biostatistics, Faculty of Medicine, Yıldırım Beyazıt University, Ankara, Turkey. 4. Department of Dentomaxillofacial Radiology, Faculty of Dentistry, Ankara University, Ankara, Turkey.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of mandibular lingual concavities and to measure them using CBCT (Cone-Beam Computerized Tomography). METHODS: In this study, CBCT scans of 200 patients requiring dental implants were assessed for lingual concavities. Reconstructed CBCT images were transferred as DICOM files to the 3D DOCTOR software program, and metric, volumetric, and surface area measurements were obtained. Two-way mixed ANOVA was used to model side (left/right, anterior), measurement type, and gender with side and type taken as within-subject variables, gender as between-subject variables, and age as a covariate. A comparison between the dentate and edentulous groups in the samples with lingual concavities was performed using an unpaired Student's t test. RESULTS: Submandibular concavity mean depth and volume were found to be 2.4 mm and 130.7 mm(3), whereas mean depth and volume of sublingual concavities were found to be 1.3 mm and 26.5 mm(3). Significant inverse ratios were found between age and volume and between age and surface area (p < 0.05). All measurements were higher in males than females, but the differences were not statistically significant. The differences between the presence of concavity (sublingual, right, and left submandibular) and dental status (dentate/edentulous) were statistically insignificant (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Mandibular lingual concavity dimensions were found to vary by age, location, and the presence/absence of teeth. Third party software can be used to generate 3-dimensional models that provide useful information about shape, size, and location of sublingual and submandibular concavities prior to implant placement.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of mandibular lingual concavities and to measure them using CBCT (Cone-Beam Computerized Tomography). METHODS: In this study, CBCT scans of 200 patients requiring dental implants were assessed for lingual concavities. Reconstructed CBCT images were transferred as DICOM files to the 3D DOCTOR software program, and metric, volumetric, and surface area measurements were obtained. Two-way mixed ANOVA was used to model side (left/right, anterior), measurement type, and gender with side and type taken as within-subject variables, gender as between-subject variables, and age as a covariate. A comparison between the dentate and edentulous groups in the samples with lingual concavities was performed using an unpaired Student's t test. RESULTS: Submandibular concavity mean depth and volume were found to be 2.4 mm and 130.7 mm(3), whereas mean depth and volume of sublingual concavities were found to be 1.3 mm and 26.5 mm(3). Significant inverse ratios were found between age and volume and between age and surface area (p < 0.05). All measurements were higher in males than females, but the differences were not statistically significant. The differences between the presence of concavity (sublingual, right, and left submandibular) and dental status (dentate/edentulous) were statistically insignificant (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Mandibular lingual concavity dimensions were found to vary by age, location, and the presence/absence of teeth. Third party software can be used to generate 3-dimensional models that provide useful information about shape, size, and location of sublingual and submandibular concavities prior to implant placement.
Authors: K Kamburoğlu; S Murat; C Kılıç; S Yüksel; H Avsever; A Farman; W C Scarfe Journal: Dentomaxillofac Radiol Date: 2014-03-20 Impact factor: 2.419
Authors: Cristina Palma-Carrió; Jose Balaguer-Martínez; David Peñarrocha-Oltra; María Peñarrocha-Diago Journal: Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal Date: 2011-11-01