Display options
Share it on

Eur J Dent. 2021 May;15(2):266-272. doi: 10.1055/s-0040-1721294. Epub 2020 Dec 26.

Evaluation of Panoramic Radiographs in Relation to the Mandibular Third Molar and to Incidental Findings in an Adult Population.

European journal of dentistry

Josefine Cederhag, Nina Lundegren, Per Alstergren, Xie-Qi Shi, Kristina Hellén-Halme

Affiliations

  1. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Faculty of Odontology, Malmö University, Malmö, Sweden.
  2. Department of Oral Diagnostics, Faculty of Odontology, Malmö University, Malmö, Sweden.
  3. Department of Orofacial Pain and Jaw Function, Faculty of Odontology, Malmö University, Malmö, Sweden.
  4. Specialized Pain Rehabilitation, Skåne University Hospital, Lund, Sweden.
  5. Section of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Department of Clinical Dentistry, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.

PMID: 33368065 PMCID: PMC8184276 DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1721294

Abstract

OBJECTIVES:  The aim was to evaluate the characteristics of the mandibular third molars, especially in relation to the inferior alveolar nerve. Further aims were to investigate incidental findings in panoramic radiographs in an adult population, and to investigate image quality related to patient positioning.

MATERIALS AND METHODS:  From a previous study with 451 randomly selected adult participants who lived in Sweden, 442 panoramic radiographs from four dental public health clinics were used. The third molars' characteristics and relation to inferior alveolar nerve were evaluated. Incidental findings and patient positioning were recorded.

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS:  Frequency analysis was used to investigate the occurrence of all findings and their possible interconnections. Whether the patients' age or gender had an impact or not was also analyzed.

RESULTS:  The third molars were erupted in vertical position among 73% regardless of age. When retained or semi-retained, they were most commonly in mesioangular positions. The inferior alveolar nerve was located inferior to the roots in 52%, whereas an overlapped position was most common if the third molar was retained (90%), semi-retained (83%) or the age was less than 30 years (66%). Common incidental findings were apical radiolucencies, idiopathic osteosclerosis, and tooth fragments. Suboptimal patient positioning was found in one-third of the radiographs.

CONCLUSIONS:  Panoramic radiography is a useful method to evaluate third molar prior to surgical removal and may be the only image required. Most incidental findings on panoramic radiographs does not seem to require any further odontological management.

European Journal of Dentistry. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial-License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Conflict of interest statement

None declared.

References

  1. Imaging Sci Dent. 2014 Mar;44(1):1-6 - PubMed
  2. J Chin Med Assoc. 2015 Oct;78(10):617-22 - PubMed
  3. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2008 Oct;66(10):2130-5 - PubMed
  4. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2008 Sep;37(6):340-3 - PubMed
  5. Angle Orthod. 2006 Jan;76(1):98-102 - PubMed
  6. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2010 Apr;39(4):320-6 - PubMed
  7. BMC Oral Health. 2018 Apr 4;18(1):58 - PubMed
  8. Ann ICRP. 2007;37(2-4):1-332 - PubMed
  9. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2003 Oct;32(5):548-52 - PubMed
  10. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2014;43(6):20140001 - PubMed
  11. Acta Odontol Scand. 2012 Dec;70(6):511-9 - PubMed
  12. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1989 Oct;18(5):277-80 - PubMed
  13. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2004 Feb;42(1):21-7 - PubMed
  14. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2010 Jan;68(1):74-82 - PubMed
  15. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2001 Aug;92(2):150-5 - PubMed
  16. Niger J Clin Pract. 2015 Jan-Feb;18(1):8-12 - PubMed
  17. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2013 Apr;115(4):550-7 - PubMed
  18. J Dent. 1996 May;24(3):185-201 - PubMed
  19. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1993 Dec;76(6):699-703 - PubMed
  20. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 Jul 29;(7):CD004345 - PubMed
  21. Swed Dent J. 2014;38(4):179-85 - PubMed
  22. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 1996 Jul;82(1):10-7 - PubMed
  23. Swed Dent J. 2014;38(1):31-8 - PubMed
  24. Br Dent J. 1999 Jun 26;186(12):630-3 - PubMed
  25. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2005 Nov;100(5):545-9 - PubMed
  26. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2003 Jan;95(1):119-25 - PubMed
  27. Imaging Sci Dent. 2012 Dec;42(4):207-12 - PubMed
  28. Imaging Sci Dent. 2020 Mar;50(1):53-64 - PubMed
  29. Acta Odontol Scand. 2011 Nov;69(6):355-9 - PubMed
  30. Clin Oral Investig. 2019 Mar;23(3):1015-1022 - PubMed
  31. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 1997 Apr;83(4):517-21 - PubMed
  32. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2017 May;46(5):628-635 - PubMed
  33. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2008 Oct;37(7):380-4 - PubMed
  34. Swed Dent J Suppl. 1991;78:1-129 - PubMed

Publication Types