CBCT Evaluation of Buccolingual Orientation of Inferior Alveolar Canal in Mandibular Posterior Region for Implant Planning
Table 3
The one-way ANOVA and independent t-test results showing the variations in the mean values of B, C, and L according to the ethnicity and sex group among Malaysian population.
Ethnicity
value
Sex
value
Overall (N = 121)
Malay (n = 40)
Chinese (n = 41)
Indian (n = 40)
Male (n = 61)
Female (n = 60)
Right
Second molar (47)
B
6.23
6.08
6.08
0.89
6.19
6.07
0.06
6.13
C
2.80
3.48
2.71
<0.001
3.13
2.87
0.70
3.00
L
2.48
2.92
2.07
0.01
2.54
2.44
0.06
2.49
First molar (46)
B
4.60
4.71
4.09
0.13
4.77
4.15
0.01
4.46
C
2.88
3.50
3.19
0.001
3.35
3.03
0.95
3.19
L
3.30
3.31
2.65
0.04
2.88
3.30
0.37
3.09
Second premolar (45)
B
3.01
3.47
2.80
0.38
3.33
2.85
0.52
3.10
C
3.08
3.60
3.22
0.08
3.32
3.28
0.39
3.30
L
3.78
4.20
4.30
0.68
4.08
4.10
0.60
4.09
Left
Second molar (37)
B
6.29
6.38
5.72
0.15
6.23
6.03
0.73
6.13
C
2.65
3.07
2.79
0.02
3.05
2.62
0.13
2.84
L
2.65
2.98
2.09
0.001
2.46
2.70
0.32
2.58
First molar (36)
B
4.42
4.77
4.21
0.30
4.76
4.17
0.62
4.47
C
2.84
2.97
2.86
0.58
2.97
2.81
0.10
2.89
L
3.40
3.74
2.63
0.001
3.14
3.38
0.25
3.26
Second premolar (35)
B
3.83
3.14
2.82
0.19
3.10
3.21
0.33
3.14
C
2.89
3.21
2.90
0.50
3.12
2.80
0.66
2.99
L
4.43
5.01
3.96
0.15
4.38
4.33
0.58
4.36
B: buccal bone width; C: canal thickness; L: lingual bone width of IAN in mm. Statistically significant difference ().
