Volume 22, Issue 2 pp. 201-206

Cross-sectional analysis of the mandibular lingual concavity using cone beam computed tomography

Hsun-Liang Chan

Hsun-Liang Chan

School of Dentistry, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA

Search for more papers by this author
Sharon L. Brooks

Sharon L. Brooks

Department of Periodontics and Oral Medicine, School of Dentistry, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA

Search for more papers by this author
Jia-Hui Fu

Jia-Hui Fu

School of Dentistry, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA

Search for more papers by this author
Chu-Yuan Yeh

Chu-Yuan Yeh

School of Dentistry, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA

Search for more papers by this author
Ivan Rudek

Ivan Rudek

School of Dentistry, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA

Search for more papers by this author
Hom-Lay Wang

Hom-Lay Wang

Department of Periodontics & Oral Medicine, School of Dentistry, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.

Eng. A.B. Research Chair for Growth Factors and Bone Regeneration, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 06 October 2010
Citations: 59
Corresponding author:
Hom-Lay Wang
1011 North University Avenue
Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1078, USA
Tel.: +1 734 763-3383
Fax: +1 734 936 0374
e-mail: [email protected]

Abstract

Objectives: To study the prevalence and the degree of lingual concavity in the edentulous first molar region from cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans of the mandibles.

Material and methods: Qualified cross-sectional images in mandibular first molar edentulous region taken from CBCT were selected. The mandible morphology 2 mm above the inferior alveolar canal (IAC) was classified into the convex (C), parallel (P) and undercut (U) type, based on the presence of lingual concavity and the shape of alveolar ridge. The prevalence of each group was determined. Subsequently, the lingual concavity characters, including the depth, the angulation and the vertical location were determined by the measurements of selected anatomic landmarks.

Results: One hundred and three subjects (mean age 51 with a range of 23.7–70.4 years) were studied. The U type was the most prevalent, accounting for 66% of the study population. The mean undercut depth and angulation at the level 2 mm above IAC were on average 2.4 mm and 57.7°. The mean vertical distances from the most prominent point (P) of the lingual concavity to the cemento-enamel junction of second premolar and the inferior border of the mandible were 11.7 and 14.9 mm, respectively.

Conclusions: The anatomic location and the degree of the lingual concavity presented in this article add more information in implant treatment planning in the mandibular first molar edentulous region.

To cite this article:
Chan H-L, Brooks SL, Fu J-H, Yeh C-Y, Rudek I, Wang H-L. Cross-sectional analysis of the mandibular lingual concavity using cone beam computed tomography.
Clin. Oral Impl. Res. 22, 2011; 201–206.
doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.02018.x

The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.