Online first
Review article
Published online: 2025-02-06

open access

Page views 293
Article views/downloads 176
Get Citation

Connect on Social Media

Connect on Social Media

Nasopalatine canal morphology: CBCT review & nomenclature proposal

Ashraf Mohammed Alhumaidi1, Mohammed M. Al Moaleem2, Thrya S. Gadah3, Nasser M. Alahmari3, Bandar M.A. Al Makramani2, Khurshid Mattoo2, Husham E. Homeida4

Abstract

Background: The nasopalatine canal (NPC), or incisive canal, is an interosseous conduit in the premaxilla, located just behind the maxillary central incisors. Its variations must be carefully considered in dental and oral surgical procedures, especially with the higher aesthetic considerations in the premaxilla. This study aims to assess the morphology of NPC and its variations across different populations while proposing a new classification system for naming and describing the NPC. Materials and methods: Following the PRISMA guidelines, the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome format was applied to formulate the intensive question. An electronic literature search was conducted in Google Scholar by using the subsequent databases: Clarivate Analytics’ or ISI Web of Science, Elsevier’s Scopus, and PubMed (MEDLINE). No restriction was placed on studies after the 2013 publication year. The keywords used were NPC morphology, incisive canal morphology, incisive foramen, NPC foramen, NPC shape, incisive canal shape, incisive canal, and NPC. Outstanding full-text studies were assessed according to inclusion and exclusion criteria, and appropriate reports were nominated. The collected data were analyzed and subjected to risk of bias and quality assessment. Results: Ten full-length papers with a total of 1697 participants are included. Among them, the cylindrical shape, slant-straight course, and single canal are the most commonly observed in both sagittal and coronal views. Conclusions: This review highlights the significant variability in the anatomical morphology of NPC across different populations, presenting challenges in establishing a standardized classification system. In order, the current study introduces a new, adaptable naming system to be utilized in education, research, and by clinicians during the description of the NPC anatomy.

Article available in PDF format

View PDF Download PDF file

References

  1. Al-Amery SM, Nambiar P, Jamaludin M, et al. Cone beam computed tomography assessment of the maxillary incisive canal and foramen: considerations of anatomical variations when placing immediate implants. PLoS One. 2015; 10(2): e0117251.
  2. Al-Ghurabi ZH, Al-Bahrani ZM. Radiographic assessment of nasopalatine canal using cone beam computed tomography. J Craniofac Surg. 2020; 31(1): e4–e6.
  3. Al-Shamiri HM, Elfaki S, Al-Maweri SA, et al. Development of nasopalatine duct cyst in relation to dental implant placement. N Am J Med Sci. 2016; 8(1): 13–16.
  4. Alasmari D. Morphometric evaluation of morphological variations of the nasopalatine canal: a retrospective study using cone-beam computed tomography. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2023; 24(9): 660–667.
  5. Alhumaidi AM, Aseri AA, Alahmari MM, et al. Morphological and dimensional analysis of the nasopalatine canal: insights from cone-beam computed tomography imaging in a large cohort. Med Sci Monit. 2024; 30: e944424.
  6. Alhumaidi AM, Okshah A, Al Moaleem MM, et al. Sex and population variations in nasopalatine canal dimensions: a CBCT-based systematic review. Med Sci Monit. 2024; 30: e945949.
  7. Angelopoulos C, Thomas SL, Hechler S, et al. Comparison between digital panoramic radiography and cone-beam computed tomography for the identification of the mandibular canal as part of presurgical dental implant assessment. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2008; 66(10): 2130–2135.
  8. Aydin KC, Gaş S. Anatomical and morphological assessment of nasopalatine canal in pediatric and adolescent population via cone beam computed tomography. J Craniofac Surg. 2021; 32(6): 1994–1998.
  9. Bahşi I, Orhan M, Kervancıoğlu P, et al. Anatomical evaluation of nasopalatine canal on cone beam computed tomography images. Folia Morphol. 2019; 78(1): 153–162.
  10. Baldini B, Cavagnetto D, Baselli G, et al. Cephalometric measurements performed on CBCT and reconstructed lateral cephalograms: a cross-sectional study providing a quantitative approach of differences and bias. BMC Oral Health. 2022; 22(1): 98.
  11. Bastir M, Rosas A, O'higgins P. Craniofacial levels and the morphological maturation of the human skull. J Anat. 2006; 209(5): 637–654.
  12. Bornstein MM, Balsiger R, Sendi P, et al. Morphology of the nasopalatine canal and dental implant surgery: a radiographic analysis of 100 consecutive patients using limited cone-beam computed tomography. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2011; 22(3): 295–301.
  13. Buser D, Martin W, Belser UC. Optimizing esthetics for implant restorations in the anterior maxilla: anatomic and surgical considerations. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2004; 19 Suppl: 43–61.
  14. Cho EA, Kim SJ, Choi YJ, et al. Morphologic evaluation of the incisive canal and its proximity to the maxillary central incisors using computed tomography images. Angle Orthod. 2016; 86(4): 571–576.
  15. Chung CJ, Choi YJ, Kim KH. Approximation and contact of the maxillary central incisor roots with the incisive canal after maximum retraction with temporary anchorage devices: Report of 2 patients. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2015; 148(3): 493–502.
  16. da Costa ED, Nejaim Y, Martins LA, et al. Morphological evaluation of the nasopalatine canal in patients with different facial profiles and ages. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2019; 77(4): 721–729.
  17. Demiralp KÖ, Kurşun-Çakmak EŞ, Bayrak S, et al. Evaluation of anatomical and volumetric characteristics of the nasopalatine canal in anterior dentate and edentulous individuals: a CBCT study. Implant Dent. 2018; 27(4): 474–479.
  18. Ducommun J, Bornstein MM, Wong MC, et al. Distances of root apices to adjacent anatomical structures in the anterior maxilla: an analysis using cone beam computed tomography. Clin Oral Investig. 2019; 23(5): 2253–2263.
  19. Etoz M, Sisman Y. Evaluation of the nasopalatine canal and variations with cone-beam computed tomography. Surg Radiol Anat. 2014; 36(8): 805–812.
  20. Fernández-Alonso A, Suárez-Quintanilla JA, Muinelo-Lorenzo J, et al. Three-dimensional study of nasopalatine canal morphology: a descriptive retrospective analysis using cone-beam computed tomography. Surg Radiol Anat. 2014; 36(9): 895–905.
  21. Firincioglulari M, Orhan K. Morphological variations of the nasopalatine canal in the North Cyprus population: a cone beam computed tomography study. Med Sci Monit. 2024; 30: e944868.
  22. Friedrich RE, Laumann F, Zrnc T, et al. The nasopalatine canal in adults on cone beam computed tomograms — a clinical study and review of the literature. In Vivo. 2015; 29(4): 467–486.
  23. Görürgöz C, Öztaş B. Anatomic characteristics and dimensions of the nasopalatine canal: a radiographic study using cone-beam computed tomography. Folia Morphol. 2021; 80(4): 923–934.
  24. Iamandoiu A, Mureşan A, Rusu M. Detailed morphology of the incisive or nasopalatine canal. Anatomia. 2022; 1(1): 75–85.
  25. Jain NV, Gharatkar AA, Parekh BA, et al. Three-dimensional analysis of the anatomical characteristics and dimensions of the nasopalatine canal using cone beam computed tomography. J Maxillofac Oral Surg. 2017; 16(2): 197–204.
  26. Khan M, Habib S, Ghafoor R. Evaluation of the nasopalatine canal (NPC) in a subset of Pakistani population, using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). J Pak Med Assoc. 2023; 73(1): 49–53.
  27. Kuc AE, Kotuła J, Nawrocki J, et al. The assessment of the rank of torque control during incisor retraction and its impact on the resorption of maxillary central incisor roots according to incisive canal anatomy-systematic review. J Clin Med. 2023; 12(8).
  28. Lake S, Iwanaga J, Kikuta S, et al. The incisive canal: a comprehensive review. Cureus. 2018; 10(7): e3069.
  29. Liang X, Jacobs R, Martens W, et al. Macro- and micro-anatomical, histological and computed tomography scan characterization of the nasopalatine canal. J Clin Periodontol. 2009; 36(7): 598–603.
  30. Linjawi AI, Othman MA, Dirham AA, et al. Morphological evaluation of the incisive canal with reference to gender and age: a cone-beam computed tomography study. Niger J Clin Pract. 2021; 24(11): 1596–1601.
  31. López Jornet P, Boix P, Sanchez Perez A, et al. Morphological characterization of the anterior palatine region using cone beam computed tomography. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2015; 17 Suppl 2: e459–e464.
  32. Magat G, Akyuz M. Are morphological and morphometric characteristics of maxillary anterior region and nasopalatine canal related to each other? Oral Radiol. 2023; 39(2): 372–385.
  33. Mardinger O, Namani-Sadan N, Chaushu G, et al. Morphologic changes of the nasopalatine canal related to dental implantation: a radiologic study in different degrees of absorbed maxillae. J Periodontol. 2008; 79(9): 1659–1662.
  34. de Mello JS, Faot F, Correa G, et al. Success rate and complications associated with dental implants in the incisive canal region: a systematic review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2017; 46(12): 1584–1591.
  35. McCrea SJJ. Aberrations causing neurovascular damage in the anterior maxilla during dental implant placement. Case Rep Dent. 2017; 2017: 5969643.
  36. Milanovic P, Selakovic D, Vasiljevic M, et al. Morphological characteristics of the nasopalatine canal and the relationship with the anterior maxillary bone-a cone beam computed tomography study. Diagnostics (Basel). 2021; 11(5).
  37. Miracle AC, Mukherji SK. Conebeam CT of the head and neck, part 1: physical principles. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2009; 30(6): 1088–1095.
  38. Miracle AC, Mukherji SK. Conebeam CT of the head and neck, part 2: clinical applications. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2009; 30(7): 1285–1292.
  39. Neves FS, Oliveira LK, Ramos Mariz AC, et al. Rare anatomical variation related to the nasopalatine canal. Surg Radiol Anat. 2013; 35(9): 853–855.
  40. Nikkerdar N, Golshah A. Anatomical variations of the nasopalatine canal using cone beam computed tomography in a subpopulation residing in West of Iran. Ann Dent Spec. 2018; 6(3): 311–316.
  41. Özçakır-Tomruk C, Dölekoğlu S, Özkurt-Kayahan Z, et al. Evaluation of morphology of the nasopalatine canal using cone-beam computed tomography in a subgroup of Turkish adult population. Surg Radiol Anat. 2016; 38(1): 65–70.
  42. Özeren Keşkek C, Aytuğar E, Çene E. Retrospective assessment of the anatomy and dimensions of nasopalatine canal with cone-beam computed tomography. J Oral Maxillofac Res. 2022; 13(2): e4.
  43. Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021; 372: n71.
  44. Rai S, Misra D, Misra A, et al. Significance of morphometric and anatomic variations of nasopalatine canal on cone-beam computed tomography in anterior functional zone — a retrospective study. Ann Maxillofac Surg. 2021; 11(1): 108–114.
  45. Rao JB, Tatuskar P, Pulla A, et al. Radiographic assessment of anatomy of nasopalatine canal for dental implant placement: a cone beam computed tomographic study. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2018; 19(3): 301–305.
  46. Safi Y, Moshfeghi M, Rahimian S, et al. Assessment of nasopalatine canal anatomic variations using cone beam computed tomography in a group of Iranian population. I J Radiol. 2016; 14(1).
  47. Sicher H. Anatomy and oral pathology. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1962; 15(10): 1264–1269.
  48. Sobiesk JL, Munakomi S. Anatomy, head and neck, nasal cavity. StatPearls [Internet]., Treasure Island 2022.
  49. Soman C. Assessment of the nasopalatine canal length and shape using cone-beam computed tomography: a retrospective morphometric study. Diagnostics (Basel). 2024; 14(10).
  50. Song WC, Jo DI, Lee JY, et al. Microanatomy of the incisive canal using three-dimensional reconstruction of microCT images: an ex vivo study. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2009; 108(4): 583–590.
  51. Sterne JAc, Hernán MA, Reeves BC, et al. ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions. BMJ. 2016; 355: i4919.
  52. Stull K, New B, Corron L, et al. Exploring mutual and exclusive biological information in cranial metric and morphological variables. Forensic Anthropol. 2024; 7(2–3).
  53. Tafakhori Z, Rooholamini A. Assessing the morphology of nasopalatine canal in a subset of the Iranian population using cone beam computed tomography. J Dent Materials Techniques. 2023; 12(4): 1576.
  54. Thakur AR, Burde K, Guttal K, et al. Anatomy and morphology of the nasopalatine canal using cone-beam computed tomography. Imaging Sci Dent. 2013; 43(4): 273–281.
  55. Tyndall DA, Price JB, Tetradis S, et al. American Academy of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology. Position statement of the american academy of oral and maxillofacial radiology on selection criteria for the use of radiology in dental implantology with emphasis on cone beam computed tomography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2012; 113(6): 817–826.
  56. Weiss R, Read-Fuller A. Cone beam computed tomography in oral and maxillofacial surgery: an evidence-based review. Dent J (Basel). 2019; 7(2).
  57. Yülek H, Keser G, Pekiner FN. Evaluation of nasopalatine canal morphology by cone-beam computerized tomography. Curr res dent sci. Curr Res Dent Sci. 2024; 24(1): 59–65.
  58. Research progress on nasopalatine canal type and its relationship with central incisor position. Front Med Sci Res. 2023; 5(1): 1–8.