Objectives: This epidemiological study aimed to analyse economical and societal consequences in Denmark if CBCT is used routinely as a diagnostic method before removal of the mandibular third molar. Furthermore, the aim was to calculate the excess cancer incidence from this practice. Methods: 17 representative dental clinics in the regions of Denmark were visited by two observers, who registered the total number of patients in each clinic, the number of removed mandibular third molars from patients' files together with the age and gender of these patients. The data were collected from 2008 to 2014. The total number of removed mandibular third molars in Denmark each year was derived from the collected data and information on patients' contacts with dentists from Statistics Denmark as a sum of contributions from each region. The contribution of a region was obtained as the number of removed mandibular third molars in the selected clinics in the region times the ratio of the number of patients in the selected clinics in the region to the total number of patients with contact to a general practitioner in the region in 2011. Existing knowledge on the costs for panoramic and CBCT imaging was used to calculate total costs. The cancer incidence was calculated from lifetime attributable risk curves based on linear risk assumptions. Results: The selected clinics included 109,686 patients, and 1369 mandibular third molars had been surgically removed. Using data from Statistics Denmark gave an estimated annual number of removed mandibular third molars of 36,882 at a total cost of €6,633,400. The additional cancer incidence was estimated to be approximately 0.46 per year. Conclusions: The data should be used in a cost-effectiveness analysis of the clinical efficacy of CBCT imaging before removal of mandibular third molars.

The use of CBCT before removal of the mandibular third molar does not seem to reduce the number of neurosensoric disturbances.

Costs for a CBCT examination were approximately four times the costs for panoramic imaging when used prior to removal of a mandibular third molar. The use of CBCT did not change the resources used for surgery, post-surgical treatment and patient complication management.

No abstract

Objectives: To assess radiographic methods and diagnostically sufficient images used before removal of mandibular third molars among randomly selected general dental clinics. Furthermore, to assess factors predisposing for an additional radiographic examination. Methods: 2 observers visited 18 randomly selected clinics in Denmark and studied patient files, including radiographs of patients who had their mandibular third molar(s) removed. The radiographic unit and type of receptor were registered. A diagnostically sufficient image was defined as the whole tooth and mandibular canal were displayed in the radiograph (yes/no). Overprojection between the tooth and mandibular canal (yes/no) and patient-reported inferior alveolar nerve sensory disturbances (yes/no) were recorded. Regression analyses tested if overprojection between the third molar and the mandibular canal and an insufficient intraoral image predisposed for additional radiographic examination(s). Results: 1500 mandibular third molars had been removed; 1090 had intraoral, 468 had panoramic and 67 had CBCT examination. 1000 teeth were removed after an intraoral examination alone, 433 after panoramic examination and 67 after CBCT examination. 90 teeth had an additional examination after intraoral. Overprojection between the tooth and mandibular canal was a significant factor (p , 0.001, odds ratio 5 3.56) for an additional examination. 63.7% of the intraoral images were sufficient and 36.3% were insufficient, with no significant difference between images performed with phosphor plates and solid-state sensors (p 5 0.6). An insufficient image predisposed for an additional examination (p 5 0.008, odds ratio 5 1.8) but was only performed in 11% of the cases. Conclusions: Most mandibular third molars were removed based on an intraoral examination although 36.3% were insufficient. Dentomaxillofacial Radiology (2016Radiology ( ) 45, 20150226. doi: 10.1259 Cite this article as: Matzen LH, Petersen LB, Wenzel A. Radiographic methods used before removal of mandibular third molars among randomly selected general dental clinics. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2016; 45: 20150226.