The Length of the Greater Palatine Canal in a Lebanese Population: a Radio-anatomical Study

Aoun, Georges; Nasseh, Ibrahim

doi:10.5455/aim.2016.24.397-400

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The results of the meta-analysis regarding other characteristics of the GPC are presented in Table 8 . A total of 13 studies [ 3 , 4 , 23 , 25 , 34 , 35 , 50 , 52 , 59 , 67 , 70 , 75 , 76 ] ( n = 4,798 subjects) reported data on the length of the greater palatine canal. The pooled mean, across the 13 studies, was calculated to be 26.97 mm (95% CI = 23.65–30.29 mm).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Anatomy of the greater palatine foramen and canal and their clinical significance in relation to the greater palatine artery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Accurate knowledge of greater palatine foramen (GPF) and greater palatine canal (GPC) anatomy is necessary to avoid injury to the greater palatine artery (GPA) when performing a variety of anesthesiologic, dental or surgical procedures. The aim of this paper was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of literature on the anatomy and localization of bony structures associated with the GPA, namely the GPF and GPC. Methods A systematic literature search was performed using PubMed, Embase, ScienceDirect, and Web of Science databases. Seventy-five studies were included in the meta-analysis (n = 22,202 subjects). Results The meta-analysis showed that the GPF is positioned 17.21 mm (95% CI = 16.34–18.09 mm) from the posterior nasal spine, 2.56 mm (95% CI = 1.90–3.22 mm) from the posterior border of the hard palate, 46.24 mm (95% CI = 44.30–48.18 mm) from the anterior nasal spine, 15.22 mm (95% CI = 15.00–15.43 mm) from the midline maxillary suture, 37.32 mm (95% CI = 36.19–38.45 mm) from the incisive foramen, and opposite the third maxillary molar (M3) in 64.9% (58.7–70.7%) of the total population. Conclusion An up-to-date, comprehensive analysis of GPF and GPC clinical anatomy is presented. The results from this evidence-based anatomical study provides a unified set of data to aid clinicians in their practice.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A total of 3 studies [ 3 , 25 , 59 ] ( n = 360) reported data on the anteroposterior diameter of the upper opening of the greater palatine canal. The pooled mean, across the three studies, was calculated to be 3.88 mm (95% CI = 3.77–3.99 mm).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Anatomy of the greater palatine foramen and canal and their clinical significance in relation to the greater palatine artery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Morphometric evaluation and clinical implications of the greater palatine foramen, greater palatine canal and pterygopalatine fossa on CBCT images and review of literature

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Morphology and morphometry of the greater palatine foramen: A radio‐anatomical study using cone‐beam computed tomography

Akkitap

2024

Oral Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to evaluate the morphology and morphometry of the greater palatine foramen (GPF) using cone‐beam computed tomography (CBCT).Materials and MethodsThis study included 300 CBCT images and a total of 600 GPFs were evaluated bilaterally. GPF morphology was categorised as round, antero‐posteriorly elongated (APE), or latero‐medially elongated (LME). The distance of GPF relative to the palatine suture (PS), the incisive foramen (IF), and the palatine alveolar ridge (PAR), the distance between the right GPF (GPFr) and left GPF (GPFl) and the angle formed by GPF, IF, and PS were evaluated. The GPF location was also assessed in reference to the maxillary molars.Results64.1% of total GPFs were APE in shape. Male patients presented higher GPF‐related linear and angular measurements on both sides (p < 0.05). Patients aged ≥25 years had larger distances between GPFr–PS, GPFl–PS, GPFr–GPFl, and GPFl–IF (p = 0.001, p = 0.009, p < 0.001, and p = 0.048, respectively; p < 0.05). Patients aged ≤24 years showed a larger distance between GPFl–PAR (p = 0.011; p < 0.05). The distance between GPFl–IF was larger compared to the distance between GPFr–IF, but the angle between GPFr–IF–PS was larger than the angle between GPFl–IF–PS (p = 0.043 and p = 0.004, respectively; p < 0.05). 64.83% of all GPFs were located opposite the maxillary third molar.ConclusionThe shape and location of the GPF exhibit considerable variability. CBCT is a valuable diagnostic modality for assessing anatomical differences in the GPF.

show abstract

The Length of the Greater Palatine Canal in a Lebanese Population: a Radio-anatomical Study

Cited by 4 publications

References 10 publications

Anatomy of the greater palatine foramen and canal and their clinical significance in relation to the greater palatine artery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Anatomy of the greater palatine foramen and canal and their clinical significance in relation to the greater palatine artery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Morphometric evaluation and clinical implications of the greater palatine foramen, greater palatine canal and pterygopalatine fossa on CBCT images and review of literature

Morphology and morphometry of the greater palatine foramen: A radio‐anatomical study using cone‐beam computed tomography

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About