| Literature DB >> 24089614 |
Stefano Corbella1, Massimo Del Fabbro, Igor Tsesis, Silvio Taschieri.
Abstract
The aim of this paper was to review the literature about the use of computerized tomography to evaluate the presence and characteristics of the second mesiobuccal canal in the maxillary first molar. An electronic search was performed. Frequencies of the presence of second mesiobuccal canal and root anatomy characteristics were extracted from the selected studies. Pooled frequencies were calculated as weighted means. Seven articles were included. A second mesiobuccal canal was present in 59.32% of the teeth, and it was noncommunicating in 58.45% of teeth presenting the canal itself. The most common root canal morphology was single canal or two separated canals. The present paper showed that cone beam CT is a viable radiologic device for the evaluation of the mesiobuccal root of maxillary first molars. In fact, it was observed that the frequency of second mesiobuccal canal detection is similar to those presented by clinical studies or micro-CT evaluations.Entities:
Year: 2013 PMID: 24089614 PMCID: PMC3781839 DOI: 10.1155/2013/614898
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Dent ISSN: 1687-8728
Figure 1Article selection process.
Study characteristics.
| Authors | Year | Study | Device | Characteristics (machine; voxel size) | Population | Patients/teeth |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CBCT | ||||||
| Filho et al. [ | 2009 |
| CBCT | i-CAT; 0.2 mm3 | Brazil | NR/54 |
| Blattner et al. [ | 2010 |
| CBCT | i-CAT; NR | — | NE/20 |
| Neelakantan et al. [ | 2010 |
| CBCT | 3D accuitomo; 0.125 mm3 | India | NR/220 |
| Zhang et al. [ | 2011 |
| CBCT | 3D accuitomo; 0.125 mm3 | China | 269/299 |
| Lee et al. [ | 2011 |
| CBCT | Volux; 0.167 mm3 | Republic of Korea | 276/458 |
| Kim et al. [ | 2012 |
| CBCT | Dinnova; 0.167 mm3 | Republic of Korea | 415/814 |
| Dental CT | ||||||
| Rathi et al. [ | 2010 |
| Dental CT | Somatom; 1 mm3 | India; age: 11–77 y | 100/100 |
NR: Not reported; NE: Not estimable; MB: mesiobuccal.
Risk of bias evaluation.
| Authors | Year | Study | Number of teeth | Data reporting | Aims of the study | Individual data | Population characteristics |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CBCT | |||||||
| Filho et al. [ | 2009 |
| Low | Moderate | Low | Low | Low |
| Blattner et al. [ | 2010 |
| Moderate | Low | Low | Low | Low |
| Neelakantan et al. [ | 2010 |
| Low | Low | Low | Low | Low |
| Zhang et al. [ | 2011 |
| Low | Low | Low | Low | Low |
| Lee et al. [ | 2011 |
| Low | Low | Low | Low | Low |
| Kim et al. [ | 2012 |
| Low | Low | Low | Low | Low |
| Dental CT | |||||||
| Rathi et al. [ | 2010 |
| Low | Low | Low | Low | Low |
Evaluation of the presence of second mesiobuccal canal.
| Authors |
| Presence of MB | MB independent | MB1 merge MB2 | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| % | Cumulative % |
| % | Cumulative % |
| % | Cumulative % | |||
| CBCT | |||||||||||
| Filho et al. [ | 54 | 21 | 38.89 | 1 | 4.76 | 20 | 95.24 | ||||
| Blattner et al. [ | 19 | 11 | 57.89 | NR | — | NR | — | ||||
| Neelakantan et al. [ | 220 | 99 | 45 | 85 | 85.86 | 12 | 12.12 | ||||
| Zhang et al. [ | 299 | 156 | 52.17 | 109 | 69.87 | 22 | 14.1 | ||||
| Lee et al. [ | 458 | 329 | 71.83 | 160 | 48.63 | 152 | 46.2 | ||||
| Kim et al. [ | 814 | 510 | 62.65 | 326 | 63.92 | 165 | 32.35 | ||||
|
| |||||||||||
| Total | 1864 | 1126 |
| 681 |
| 371 |
| ||||
|
| |||||||||||
| Dental CT | |||||||||||
| Rathi et al. [ | 100 | 39 | 39 | NR | — | NR | — | ||||
|
| |||||||||||
| Total | 100 | 39 |
| 0 |
| 0 |
| ||||
|
| |||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||||
N: total number of teeth; n: number of teeth belonging to a category; NR: not reported; Cumulative %: weighted mean proportion of teeth.
Root canal morphology following the Vertucci classification [29].
| CBCT | Authors |
| Vertucci classification | ||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T I | T II | T III | T IV | T V | T VI | T VII | T VIII | NC | |||||||||||||
| (1) | (2-1) | (1-2-1) | (2) | (1-2) | (2-1-2) | (1-2-1-2) | (3) | ||||||||||||||
| Neelakantan et al. [ | 220 | 114 | 12 | 0 | 85 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | |||||||||||
| Zhang et al. [ | 299 | 113 | 22 | 0 | 109 | 25 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |||||||||||
| Lee et al. [ | 458 | 129 | 152 | 0 | 160 | 11 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 0 | |||||||||||
| Kim et al. [ | 814 | 292 | 164 | 2 | 326 | 16 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||
| Total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||||||||
N: number of teeth.