Author/Authors :
Yildirim Derya نويسنده Department of Dentomaxillofacial Radiology, Suleyman
Demirel University Faculty of Dentistry, Isparta,
Turkey , Gormez Ozlem نويسنده Department of Dentomaxillofacial Radiology, Suleyman
Demirel University Faculty of Dentistry, Isparta,
Turkey , Bozdemir Esin نويسنده Department of Dentomaxillofacial Radiology, Suleyman
Demirel University Faculty of Dentistry, Isparta,
Turkey , Aydin Ulkem نويسنده Department of Dentomaxillofacial Radiology, Baskent
University Faculty of Dentistry, Ankara, Turkey , Yilmaz Omer نويسنده Department of Radiology, Suleyman Demirel University
Faculty of Medicine, Isparta, Turkey , Erik Ayse Aydogmus نويسنده Department of Dentomaxillofacial Radiology, Suleyman
Demirel University Faculty of Dentistry, Isparta,
Turkey , Orhan Mukadder نويسنده Department of Dentomaxillofacial Radiology, Suleyman
Demirel University Faculty of Dentistry, Isparta,
Turkey
Abstract :
Background Stafne bone cavities (SBCs) are typically seen on
panoramic radiographs as unilocular, rounded or ovoid shaped,
well-defined corticated radiolucencies that are located between the
mandibular first molar and the angle of the mandible below the inferior
alveolar canal, but they may rarely have different radiographic
appearances and locations. Objectives The purpose of this study was to
evaluate the imaging features of SBC presenting various typical and
atypical features and to show the contribution of different imaging
techniques to diagnosis. Patients and Methods Seventeen patients who had
a panoramic radiograph that revealed an image compatible with SBC were
investigated in this study. In addition to panoramic radiography,
lateral oblique mandible projection for three patients, cone beam
computed tomography (CBCT) for nine patients, magnetic resonance imaging
(MRI) for two patients were performed to determine the exact location of
the cavity and to confirm the diagnosis. Results Seventeen patients were
diagnosed with SBC. Two patients had bilobed SBC, one patient had a SBC
on the buccal surface of the posterior mandible, one patient had a SBC
located in the ramus mandible, one patient had a SBC located in the
canine-premolar region namely anterior lingual variant as rare
conditions. Conclusion Imaging techniques such as CBCT and MRI have
provided detailed information about definitive diagnosis of SBC in
addition to panoramic radiographs. These techniques show the size,
location and content of the SBC. If the SBC is atypical, complementary
imaging techniques gain more importance.