Bifid mandibular canals and their cortex thicknesses: A comparison study on images obtained from cone-beam and multislice computed tomography

Background/purpose: High prevalence of bifid mandibular canals has been visualized with various types of computerized tomography (CT). Along the canals, a various ranged corticalization was recently reported. The depiction of the fine anatomic structures on multislice and cone-beam CT images was com...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: E-Chin Shen (Author), Earl Fu (Author), Michelle Peng (Author), Yao-Dung Hsieh (Author), Hsiao-Pei Tu (Author), Min-Wen Fu (Author)
Format: Book
Published: Elsevier, 2016-06-01T00:00:00Z.
Subjects:
Online Access:Connect to this object online.
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Background/purpose: High prevalence of bifid mandibular canals has been visualized with various types of computerized tomography (CT). Along the canals, a various ranged corticalization was recently reported. The depiction of the fine anatomic structures on multislice and cone-beam CT images was compared. Material and methods: The presence or absence of the bifid canal was assessed on 327 images obtained by multislice CT (MSCT; n = 173) or by cone-beam CT (CBCT; n = 154), according to the configuration. The cortex thickness and distribution were also assessed. Results: The prevalence of bifid canal detected by CBCT was significantly greater than that detected by MSCT (42.2% vs. 18.7% for hemi-mandibles and 58.4% vs. 30.6% for patients). Cortical thickness recorded by CBCT was significantly thinner than that recorded by MSCT (0.48 mm vs. 0.65 mm, P < 0.001); however, the distributions of corticalization detected by the two tomography methods were similar. There was a significant association of cortex thickness with CT type and corticalization degree (R2 = 0.530, P < 0.001). Conclusion: Thinner cortices, but greater prevalence of bifid canals recorded by CBCT, compared to MSCT, suggests that clinicians should be cautious when using CT to interpret this fine anatomic structure.
Item Description:1991-7902
10.1016/j.jds.2016.01.002