These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: The assesment of relationship between the angulation of impacted mandibular third molar teeth and the thickness of lingual bone: A prospective clinical study.
    Author: Menziletoglu D, Tassoker M, Kubilay-Isik B, Esen A.
    Journal: Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal; 2019 Jan 01; 24(1):e130-e135. PubMed ID: 30573722.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: Our purpose was to investigate the relationship between the angulation of mandibular third molars and the thickness of the lingual bone, which can affect the risk of lingual nerve damage during lower third molars surgical extraction. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This study consisted of 104 patients (42 males and 62 females), aged between 18-42 years (24.67 ± 6.11 years). Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) images were taken for preoperative assessment. The teeth were divided into four groups according to their positions: mesioangular, distoangular, vertical and horizontal. Lingual bone thickness around impacted teeth were measured at three points: cementoenamel junction (CEJ) of the mandibular second molar, mid-root of the impacted third molar, and apex of the impacted third molar root. Two predisposing factors of lingual nerve damage were recorded: lingual bone perforated by the impacted tooth and lingual bone thinner than 1 mm. Additionally, buccolingual angulations of the teeth in each group were measured. Impacted mandibular third molars were removed in usual way. One week after surgery, the patients were evaluated regarding lingual nerve paresthesia. RESULTS: None of the 104 patients experienced paresthesia, including the ones who had teeth with close proximity with lingual nerve. The mean thickness of bone was 1.21±0.63 mm at CEJ of the second molar; 1.25±1.02 mm at the mid-root; and 1.06±1.31 mm at the apex. Horizontally impacted teeth had thinner lingual bone at mid-root level (p=0.016). Buccolingual angulated teeth were more often associated with perforated lingual bone (p=0.002). Buccolingual and mesial/distal angulation had negative correlation with lingual bone thickness (p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: As the buccolingual and mesiodistal angulations increase, lingual bone thickness decreases. Horizontally impacted teeth seemed to compromise the integrity of the lingual bone more than impacted teeth in other positions. During the surgery, thin or perforated lingual bone may result in displacement of the impacted tooth lingually.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]