FREQUENCY AND CONFIGURATION OF BIFID MANDIBULAR CANAL USING CONE BEAM COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY: A CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY AT KHYBER COLLEGE OF DENTISTRY, PESHAWAR
Main Article Content
Keywords
Abstract
The bifid mandibular canal is a common variation in the lower jaw. It has important effects during oral surgery. Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) helps to see these canals clearly. It also helps in finding and classifying them correctly. Objectives: To find out how often bifid mandibular canals are seen in patients using CBCT at Khyber College of Dentistry, Peshawar. Materials and Methods: This cross-sectional study was done in the Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Department. It took place at Khyber College of Dentistry from April to September 2023. A total of 141 CBCT scans were studied (81 male, 60 female). The scans were analyzed using Planmeca Romexis ProMax 3D Mid software [3]. Naitoh’s system was used to classify the canals. Data were analyzed using SPSS 22.0 by age, gender, and side. Results: Out of 141 patients, 33 (23.41%) had bifid canals. On the right side, 9.93% showed this feature. On the left side, 9.22% showed it. On both sides, 4.26% had it. The retromolar canal was the most common type (36%). Next came the forward canal (24%), buccolingual canal (21%), and dental canal (18%). Conclusion: The study showed a 23.41% rate of bifid canals. The retromolar canal was most frequent. No clear link was found between gender or age. CBCT is advised to detect these variations early. This helps avoid problems during surgery.
References
2. Patterson CN, Funke FC. The bifid mandibular canal: a case report. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1973;36(1):133–134. doi: 10.1016/0030-4220(73)90031-6
3. Naitoh M, Hiraiwa Y, Aimiya H, Ariji E. Bifid mandibular canal in Japanese. Implant Dent. 2007;16(1):24–32. doi: 10.1097/ID.0b013e318030c212
4. Klinge B, Petersson A, Maly P. Location of the mandibular canal: comparison of macroscopic findings, conventional radiography, and computed tomography. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1989;4(4):327–332.
5. Bogdan S, Jakubović J, Dumić A, Jalsovec D, Bišćan M, Štajduhar D. Comparative study of bifid mandibular canals in panoramic radiographs and dry mandibles. Ann Anat. 2015;199:69–73. doi: 10.1016/j.aanat.2014.07.003
6. Tantanapornkul W, Okouchi K, Fujiwara Y, Yamashiro M, Maruoka Y, Kurabayashi T. A comparative study of cone-beam computed tomography and conventional panoramic radiography in assessing the position of the inferior alveolar canal. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2007;103(2):253–259. doi: 10.1016/j.tripleo.2006.04.008
7. Neves FS, Torres MG, Oliveira C, Campos PS, Crusoe-Rebello I. Bifid mandibular canal: cone beam computed tomography evaluation. Imaging Sci Dent. 2012;42(2):103–107. doi: 10.5624/isd.2012.42.2.103
8. Kuribayashi A, Watanabe H, Imaizumi A, Tantanapornkul W, Katakami K, Kurabayashi T. Bifid mandibular canals: cone beam computed tomography evaluation. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2010;39(4):235–239. doi: 10.1259/dmfr/19603304
9. Langlais RP, Broadus R, Glass BJ. Bifid mandibular canals in panoramic radiographs. J Am Dent Assoc. 1985;110(6):923–926. doi: 10.14219/jada.archive.1985.0256
10. Wadu SG, Penhall B, Townsend GC. Morphological variability of the human inferior alveolar nerve. Clin Anat. 1997;10(2):82–87. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1098-2353(1997)10:2<82::AID-CA4>3.0.CO;2-Y
11. Naitoh M, Hiraiwa Y, Katsumata A, Ariji E. Observation of bifid mandibular canal using cone-beam computerized tomography. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2009;24(1):155–159.
12. Wismeijer D, Van Waas MAJ, Vermeeren JI, Kalk W. Patients’ perception of sensory disturbances of the mental nerve before and after implant surgery: a prospective study of 110 patients. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1997;35(4):254–259. doi: 10.1016/S0266-4356(97)90261-7
13. Park MK, Jung W, Lee JH, Lee SK. Anatomic study of bifid mandibular canals in Koreans using cone-beam computed tomography. Imaging Sci Dent. 2014;44(4):281–286. doi: 10.5624/isd.2014.44.4.281
14. Sisman Y, Etöz OA, Mavili E, Sahman H, Tarim Ertas E, Tulga A. The prevalence of bifid mandibular canals in a Turkish population using cone beam computed tomography. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2012;27(4):1009–1013.
15. Naitoh M, Aimiya H, Hiraiwa Y, Ariji E. Branching pattern of the mandibular canal in the molar region observed by cone beam computed tomography. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2011;26(1):114–117.
16. Naitoh M, Katsumata A, Kubota Y, Ariji E. Assessment of bifid mandibular canals using cone-beam computerized tomography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2009;107(2):289–294. doi: 10.1016/j.tripleo.2008.08.015
17. Patil S, Ramesh DB, Mody RN, Kumar S. Cone beam computed tomography: an advanced diagnostic imaging technique for dental practice. Int J Health Allied Sci. 2015;4(2):104–110. doi: 10.4103/2278-344X.157968
18. Zhang Q, Qiu N, Zhang H, Wang C. Prevalence and anatomical morphology of bifid mandibular canal in Han Chinese population: a study using cone-beam computed tomography. PLoS One. 2017;12(4):e0175027. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0175027
19. Rashid J, Afzal S, Niaz F, Qureshi NR, Rasool G. Assessment of bifid mandibular canal and its implications using CBCT: a study from Pakistan. Pak Oral Dent J. 2021;41(1):32–36.
20. Rehman KU, Ahmad M, Farooq A, Ameen M, Qazi SR. CBCT-based evaluation of bifid mandibular canal in patients reporting to a tertiary care hospital in Lahore. J Pak Dent Assoc. 2020;29(4):159–164.