Main Article Content
Objectives: To determine the prevalence and dimensions of lingual concavity in the posterior mandibular area of the alveolar ridge with adequate dimensions for standard implant placement by cone-beam computed tomography and evaluate the risk of lingual plate perforation by virtual implant placement.
Materials and Methods: The 208 cross-sectional images (102 patients) of the second premolar and first molar area with adequate dimensions for standard implant placement in both dentate and edentulous condition were selected. The ridge morphology above the inferior alveolar canal 2 mm was classified into 3 types; concave, parallel, and undercut type. The undercut type were further measured by using the implant planning software (coDiagnostiX®) in following topics; vertical distance from the top of crest to the deepest point of lingual concavity (V), concavity depth (D) and concavity angle (θ). The 10 mm-length virtual implants were used to determine the risk of lingual plate perforation.
Results: The undercut type was found more than 30% in every tooth location (33.70% in second premolar and 42.30%in the first molar area). The highest prevalence of undercut type (50.9%) was found at the dentate first molar area. For the dimensional parameters of lingual concavity, there were no relationships between V, D, θ with age, gender, dentate status, and tooth type. The 7% of the virtual implants in the first molar area were found to be ≤ 1mm from the lingual plate which showed the statistically significant incidence of perforation (P<0.05).
Conclusions: The lingual concavity is commonly found in the posterior mandibular area. The risk of lingual plate perforation incidence was remarkable in the mandibular first molar area. Therefore, it is advisable to take the CBCT prior to the dental implant treatment in the posterior mandibular area especially on the first molar area, even in the case with adequate alveolar ridge dimension.
Handelsman M. Surgical guidelines for dental implant placement. Br Dent J 2006; 201: 139-52.
Greenstein G, Cavallaro J, Romanos G, Tarnow D. Clinical Recommendations for Avoiding and Managing Surgical Complications Associated With Implant Dentistry: A Review. J Periodontol 2008; 79: 1317-29.
Bavitz J, Harn S, J. Homze E. Arterial supply to the floor of the mouth and lingual gingiva. Oral Surg Med Oral Pathol 1994; 77: 232-5.
Chan HL, Brooks SL, Fu JH, et al. Cross-sectional analysis of the mandibular lingual concavity using cone beam computed tomography. Clin Oral Implants Res 2011; 22: 201-6.
Quirynen M, Mraiwa N, van Steenberghe D, Jacobs R. Morphology and dimension of the mandibular jaw bone in the interforaminal region in patients requiring implants in the distal areas. Clin Oral Implants Res 2003; 14: 280-5.
Parnia F, Fard EM, Mahboub F, Hafezeqoran A, Gavgani FE. Tomographic volume evaluation of submandibular fossa in patients requiring dental implants. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2010; 109: e32-6.
Del Castillo-Pardo de Vera JL, Lopez-Arcas Calleja JM, Burgueno-Garcia M. Hematoma of the floor of the mouth and airway obstruction during mandibular dental implant placement: a case report. Oral Maxillofac Surg 2008; 12: 223-6.
Givol N, Chaushu G, Halamish-Shani T, Taicher S. Emergency Tracheostomy Following Life-Threatening Hemorrhage in the Floor of the Mouth During Immediate Implant Placement in the Mandibular Canine Region. J Periodontol 2000; 71: 1893-95.
Wanner L, Manegold-Brauer G, Brauer HU. Review of unusual intraoperative and postoperative complications associated with endosseous implant placement. Quintessence Int 2013; 44: 773-81.
Mraiwa N, Jacobs R, van Steenberghe D, Quirynen M. Clinical assessment and surgical implications of anatomic challenges in the anterior mandible. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2003; 5: 219-25.
Tyndall DA, Price JB, Tetradis S, et al. Position statement of the American Academy of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology on selection criteria for the use of radiology in dental implantology with emphasis on cone beam computed tomography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 2012; 113: 817-26.
Harris D, Horner K, Gröndahl K, et al. E.A.O. guidelines for the use of diagnostic imaging in implant dentistry 2011. A consensus workshop organized by the European Association for Osseointegration at the Medical University of Warsaw. Clin Oral Implants Res 2012; 23: 1243-53.
Guerrero ME, Jacobs R, Loubele M, et al. State-of-the-art on cone beam CT imaging for preoperative planning of implant placement. Clin Oral Investig 2006; 10: 1-7.
Suomalainen A, Vehmas T, Kortesniemi M, Robinson S, Peltola J. Accuracy of linear measurements using dental cone beam and conventional multislice computed tomography. Dentomaxillofax Radiol 2008; 37: 10-7.
Watanabe H, Mohammad Abdul M, Kurabayashi T, Aoki H. Mandible size and morphology determined with CT on a premise of dental implant operation. Surg Radiol Anat 2010; 32: 343-9.
De Souza LA, Souza Picorelli Assis NM, Ribeiro RA, Pires Carvalho AC, Devito KL. Assessment of mandibular posterior regional landmarks using cone-beam computed tomography in dental implant surgery. Ann Anat 2016; 205: 53-9.
Nickenig H-J, Wichmann M, Eitner S, Zöller JE, Kreppel M. Lingual concavities in the mandible: A morphological study using cross-sectional analysis determined by CBCT. J. of Craniomaxillofac Surg 2015; 43: 254-59.
Schropp L, Wenzel A, Kostopoulos L, Karring T. Bone healing and soft tissue contour changes following single-tooth extraction: a clinical and radiographic 12-month prospective study. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2003; 23: 313-23.
Froum S, Casanova L, Byrne S, Cho SC. Risk assessment before extraction for immediate implant placement in the posterior mandible: a computerized tomographic scan study. J Periodontol 2011; 82: 395-402.
Braut V, Bornstein MM, Lauber R, Buser D. Bone dimensions in the posterior mandible: a retrospective radiographic study using cone beam computed tomography. Part 1--analysis of dentate sites. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2012; 32: 175-84.
Nelson SJ. Wheeler's Dental Anatomy, Physiology and Occlusion. St.Louis: Elsevier 2019; 13.
Chan HL, Benavides E, Yeh CY, et al. Risk assessment of lingual plate perforation in posterior mandibular region: a virtual implant placement study using cone-beam computed tomography. J Periodontol 2011; 82: 129-35.
Huang RY, Cochran DL, Cheng WC, et al. Risk of lingual plate perforation for virtual immediate implant placement in the posterior mandible: A computer simulation study. J Am Dent Assoc 2015; 146: 735-42.
Lin M-H, Mau L-P, Cochran DL, et al. Risk assessment of inferior alveolar nerve injury for immediate implant placement in the posterior mandible: A virtual implant placement study. J Dent 2014; 42: 263-70.
Hansson S, Halldin A. Alveolar ridge resorption after tooth extraction: A consequence of a fundamental principle of bone physiology. J. Dent. Biomech. 2012; 3: 1758736012456543-43.
Schneider D, Marquardt P, Zwahlen M, Jung RE. A systematic review on the accuracy and the clinical outcome of computer-guided template-based implant dentistry. Clin Oral Implants Res 2009; 20: 73-86.
Lang NP, Pun L, Lau KY, Li KY, Wong MC. A systematic review on survival and success rates of implants placed immediately into fresh extraction sockets after at least 1 year. Clin Oral Implants Res 2012; 23: 39-66.
Froum SJ. Immediate placement of implants into extraction sockets: rationale, outcomes, technique. Alpha Omegan 2005; 98: 20-35.
Lioubavina-Hack N, Lang NP, Karring T. Significance of primary stability for osseointegration of dental implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 2006 ;17: 244-50.
Frei C, Buser D, Dula K. Study on the necessity for cross-section imaging of the posterior mandible for treatment planning of standard cases in implant dentistry. Clin Oral Implants Res 2004; 15: 490-97.
Kalpidis CD, Konstantinidis AB. Critical hemorrhage in the floor of the mouth during implant placement in the first mandibular premolar position: a case report. Implant Dent 2005; 14: 117-24.
Niamtu J, 3rd. Near-fatal airway obstruction after routine implant placement. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2001; 92: 597-600.