Morphological Analysis of the Anatomical Mandibular Lingual Concavity Using Cone Beam Computed Tomography Scans in East Asian Population—A Retrospective Study
Hee-Ju Ahn,
Soo-Hwan Byun,
Sung-Ah Che,
Sang-Yoon Park,
Sang-Min Yi,
In-Young Park,
Sung-Woon On,
Byoung-Eun Yang
Affiliations
Hee-Ju Ahn
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Hallym University Sacred Heart Hospital, Anyang 14068, Republic of Korea
Soo-Hwan Byun
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Hallym University Sacred Heart Hospital, Anyang 14068, Republic of Korea
Sung-Ah Che
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Hallym University Sacred Heart Hospital, Anyang 14068, Republic of Korea
Sang-Yoon Park
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Hallym University Sacred Heart Hospital, Anyang 14068, Republic of Korea
Sang-Min Yi
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Hallym University Sacred Heart Hospital, Anyang 14068, Republic of Korea
In-Young Park
Department of Artificial Intelligence and Robotics in Dentistry, Graduate School of Clinical Dentistry, Hallym University, Chuncheon 24252, Republic of Korea
Sung-Woon On
Department of Artificial Intelligence and Robotics in Dentistry, Graduate School of Clinical Dentistry, Hallym University, Chuncheon 24252, Republic of Korea
Byoung-Eun Yang
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Hallym University Sacred Heart Hospital, Anyang 14068, Republic of Korea
The rising demand for dental implants necessitates addressing anatomical challenges, particularly the shape of the mandible. Incorrectly angling implants can cause lingual perforations, risking damage to the inferior alveolar artery and nerve. This study analyzed 96 cone-beam computed tomography images from individuals aged 20 to 70 (8 males and 8 females) to evaluate mandibular anatomy in four areas: left and right sides and the first and second molars. Mandibular shapes were classified into U, C, and P types. U-shaped mandibles, with a wider crest width, pose the highest risk of lingual perforation. Measurements for U-shaped types included concavity angle, length, and depth. Statistical analyses (T-tests and ANOVA) with a 95% confidence interval showed no significant differences between the left and right sides. However, significant differences based on gender, age, and tooth type were found. The study found U-shapes in 34.6% of cases, P-shapes in 28.9%, and C-shapes in 36.5%, with U-shapes more common in second molars. Understanding these variations enhances the safety and effectiveness of implant procedures and oral surgeries.
