Frequency, Findings, and Bone Variations in Panoramic Radiographs among People with Total Edentulism
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##
Background: According to the 2014 National Oral Health Study, 5.20 % of the Colombian population has total edentulism and 32.8 % in the population over 65 years of age. However, other parameters relevant to the correct approach to edentulism should be analyzed with radiographic studies. Purpose: To identify the frequency and characteristics of the findings and bone variations in panoramic radiographs of totally edentulous patients. Methods: A descriptive, observational study was carried out on 10.000 panoramic radiographs, from which those corresponding to patients with total edentulism were analyzed using the CliniView 9.3 program. Variables of sex, age, alveolar ridge height, mandibular branch height and condyle, as well as radiographic findings were recorded. Results: 112 radiographs of patients with total edentulism were found, 51.8 % with some type of incidental finding. Most frequent were implants 33.9 % followed by root remains in 13.4 %. There were no differences in the averages of the bone measurements on both sides. Men have higher alveolar ridge height in the lower jaw than women (p <0.05). Condylar height values were similar for both sexes. A higher value of the height of the mandibular branch was found in men (p <0.05). Conclusions: Frequency of radiographic incidental findings in total edentulous patients is considerable. The bony variations caused by the absence of teeth must be taken into account when making clinical decisions of restoration with total prosthesis or with implants.
diagnosis, oral pathology, panoramic X-ray, total edentulism, dentistry, radiologyedentulismo total, patología oral, radiografía panorámica, odontología, radiología, diagnósticodiagnóstico, patologia oral, radiografia panorâmica, edentulismo total, odontologia, radiologia
2. Bohay RN, Stephens RG, Kogon SL. A study of the impact of screening or selective radiography on the treatment and postdelivery outcome for edentulous patients. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 1998 Sep; 86(3): 353-59.
3. Kose TE, Demirtas N, Cakir KH, Ozcan I. Evaluation of dental panoramic radiographic findings in edentulous jaws: A retrospective study of 743 patients “Radiographic features in edentulous jaws”. J Adv Prosthodont. 2015 Oct; 7(5): 380-85. doi: 10.4047/jap.2015.7.5.380.
4. Choi J. Assessment of panoramic radiography as a national oral examination tool: review of the literature. Imaging Sci Dent. 2011 Mar; 41(11): 1-6. doi: 10.5624/isd.2011.41.1.1.
5. Rivas H, Eymin Q, Quezada S. Hallazgos en radiografías panorámicas de adultos mayores de Talca, Chile. Acta Odontol Venez. 2013 Abr-Jun; 51(2).
6. Cavalcanti MC, Guirado TE, Sapata VM, Costa C, Pannuti CM, Jung RE, César Neto J. Maxillary sinus floor pneumatization and alveolar ridge resorption after tooth loss: a cross-sectional study. Braz Oral Res. 2018 Aug 6;32:e64. doi: 10.1590/1807-3107BOR-2018.vol32.0064.
7. Misch CE. Maxillary sinus augmentation for endosteal implants: organized alternative treatment plans. Int J Oral Implantol. 1987; 4(2): 49-58.
8. Awad E, Al-Dharrab A. Panoramic Radiographic Examination: A Survey of 271 Edentulous Patients. Int J Prosthodont. 2011 Jan-Feb; 24(1): 55-7.
9. Masood F, Robinson W, Beavers KS, Haney KL. Findings from panoramic radiographs of the edentulous population and review of the literature. Quintessence Int. 2007 Jun; 38(6): e298-305.
10. Bodner L, Manor E, Glazer M, Brennan PA. Cystic lesions of the jaws in edentulous patients: analysis of 27 cases. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2011 Dec; 49(8): 643-46. doi: 10.1016/j.bjoms.2010.10.009.
11. Manji A, Faucher J, Resnik R, Suzuki JB. Prevalence of maxillary sinus pathology in patients considered for sinus augmentation procedures for dental implants. Implant Dent. 2013 Aug; 22(4): 428-35. doi: 10.1097/ID.0b013e31829d1a20.
12. Güler AU, Sumer M, Sumer P, Bicer I. The evaluation of vertical heights of maxillary and mandibular bones and the location of anatomic landmarks in panoramic radiographs of edentulous patients for implant dentistry. J Oral Rehabil. 2005 Oct; 32(10): 741-46.
13. Sairam V, Potturi GR, Praveen B, Vikas G. Assessment of effect of age, gender, and dentoalveolar changes on mandibular morphology: A digital panoramic study. Contemp Clin Dent 2018 Jan-Mar; 9(1): 49-54.
14. Panchbhai A. Quantitative estimation of vertical heights of maxillary and mandibular jawbones in elderly dentate and edentulous subjects. Spec Care Dentist. 2013 Mar-Apr; 33(2): 62-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1754-4505.2012.00301.x.
15. Yüzügüllü B, Gulsahi A, Imirzalioglu P. Radiomorphometric indices and their relation to alveolar bone loss in completely edentulous Turkish patients: A retrospective study. J Prosthet Dent. 2009 Mar; 101(3): 160-65. doi: 10.1016/S0022-3913(09)60021-4.
16. Xie Q, Wolf J, Tilvis R, Ainamo A. Resorption of mandibular canal wall in the edentulous aged population. J Prosthet Dent. 1997 Jun; 77(6): 596-600.
17. Joo JK Lim YJ, Kwon HB, Ahn SJ. Panoramic radiographic evaluation of the mandibular morphological changes in elderly dentate and edentulous subjects. Acta Odontol Scand. 2013 Mar; 71(2): 357-62. doi: 10.3109/00016357.2012.690446.
18. Alfaro C, Ayala R, Barrientos S. Rodríguez A. Prevalencia de asimetrías mandibulares en Radiografías panorámicas en población de Bogotá Colombia. Int J Morphol. 2016 Oct; 34(4): 1203-206.
19. Ministerio de Salud y Protección Social. Envejecimiento demográfico. Colombia 1951-2020: Dinámica demográfica y estructuras poblacionales. Bogotá, Colombia: Ministerio de Salud y Protección Social; abril 2013.