The risk of a lingual cortical plate fenestration or perforation, due to lingual concavity, in an edentulous posterior mandible in the region of the second premolar or first molar was found to be 0.053% if a regular 3.7-mm diameter tapered implant was used. In the presence of significant lingual concavity in the posterior mandible, a smaller regular diameter implant with a tapered design should be considered to avoid a potential fatal damage of vital structures.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Leong et al. (2011) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: