| Literature DB >> 35382485 |
Deniz Yanık1, Ahmet Mert Nalbantoğlu2.
Abstract
Objectives: Dentin thickness in concave areas of the root creates risk for complications such as strip perforation during endodontic treatment. The study aims to examine dentin thickness of the danger (DZ) and safety zone (SZ), canal configuration, and the presence of isthmus in the mesiobuccal root of maxillary molars. Material andEntities:
Keywords: Anatomy; Cone-beam Computed Tomography; Endodontics; Maxillary Molars; MeSH terms: Dentin; Molar; Root Canal Preparation; Tooth Root
Year: 2022 PMID: 35382485 PMCID: PMC8972479 DOI: 10.15644/asc56/1/6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Acta Stomatol Croat ISSN: 0001-7019
Figure 1CBCT images for each maxillary molar individually in sagittal (upper left), axial (lower left), and coronal (right) planes.
Figure 2Measurements of dentin thicknesses of maxillary molar with two mesiobuccal canals in the danger zone (upper) and safety zone (lower).
Figure 3Measurements of dentin thicknesses of maxillary molar with the single mesiobuccal canal in danger zone and safety zone.
Figure 4Schematic view of the dentin thicknesses of the mesiobuccal root with single or two canals. MB: single canal in the mesiobuccal root, MB1; buccal canal in the mesiobuccal root with two canals, MB2; palatinal canal in the mesiobuccal root with two canals. Danger zone; x and safety zone; y (Schematized by the author (A.M.N.) of this study).
Figure 5Vertucci’s canal configuration classification according to the morphology of the root canal system (Schematized by the author (A.M.N.) of this study).
Figure 6Pie chart for canal configuration types of maxillary first and second molars according to Vertucci's classification.
Incidence of MB2 canal and isthmus in maxillary first and second molar teeth (MB; single canal in the mesiobuccal root, MB2; two canals in mesiobuccal root).
|
|
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| |||
|
|
| (n=126) | (n=201) | (n=51) |
| 38.54% | 61.46% | 25.37% | ||
|
| (n=120) | (n=195) | (n=57) | |
| 38.1% | 61.90% | 29.23% | ||
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| ||
|
|
| (n=201) | (n=114) | (n=57) |
| 55.96% | 44.07% | 50% | ||
|
| (n=192) | (n=102) | (n=39) | |
| 65.31% | 34.69% | 38.23% | ||
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| ||
According to chi square test a,b statistically significant (p=0.0086); c,d statistically significant (p=0.034).
The frequency distribution (%) of the second mesiobuccal canal (MB2) in maxillary molars is based on gender and age groups.
|
|
| |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||
|
|
| (n=6) | (n=183) | (n=50) | (n=10) | (n=102) | (n=144) | |
|
| (n=12) | (n=228) | (n=148) | (n=5) | (n=138) | (n=258) | ||
|
|
| (n=12) | (n=138) | (n=144) | (n=6) | (n=174) | (n=219) | |
|
| (n=6) | (n=231) | (n=60) | (n=12) | (n=81) | (n=135) | ||
Distribution of canal types in maxillary first and second molars according to Vertucci’s classification.
|
|
|
|
|
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| (n=123) | (n=192) | (n=3) | (n=9) | 0 | |
|
| (n=114) | (n=189) | (n=6) | (n=6) | 0 | ||
|
| (n=237) | (n=381) | (n=9) | (n=15) | 0 | ||
|
|
|
|
|
| |||
|
|
| (n=201) | (n=111) | 0 | (n=3) | 0 | |
|
| (n=183) | (n=99) | (n=3) | (n=6) | (n=3) | ||
|
| (n=384) | (n=210) | (n=3) | (n=9) | (n=3) | ||
|
|
|
|
|
| |||
Descriptive analysis values of the dentin thickness of danger (DZ) and safety zone (SZ) at the mesiobuccal root with single and two canals of first and second molars (MB: single canal in the mesiobuccal root, MB1; buccal canal in the mesiobuccal root with two canals, MB2; palatinal canal in the mesiobuccal root with two canals).
According to Student t-test a,b statistically significant (p=0.0088); c,d statistically significant (p=0.0099); x,y statistically significant (p=0.015); z,t statistically significant (p=0.0045).
Mean dentin thicknesses (mm) of the danger zone (DZ) and safety zone (SZ) at the mesiobuccal canal in maxillary molars are based on gender and age groups. (MB: single canal in the mesiobuccal root, MB1; buccal canal in the mesiobuccal root with two canals, MB2; palatinal canal in the mesiobuccal root with two canals).
|
|
| |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||||
|
|
| MB | DZ | 0.88 | 0.86 | 0.90 | 0.96 | 0.88 | 0.86 | |
| SZ | 1.11 | 0.92 | 1.01 | 1.02 | 0.96 | 0.93 | ||||
|
| MB1 | DZ | 0.93 | 0.80 | 0.83 | 0.93 | 0.82 | 0.81 | ||
| SZ | 1.15 | 0.94 | 1.00 | 1.04 | 1.00 | 0.95 | ||||
| MB2 | DZ | 0.86 | 0.77 | 0.80 | 0.91 | 0.79 | 0.78 | |||
| SZ | 0.86 | 0.90 | 0.92 | 0.95 | 0.95 | 0.89 | ||||
|
|
| MB | DZ | 1.32 | 0.87 | 0.93 | 0.89 | 0.90 | 0.91 | |
| SZ | 1.39 | 0.95 | 1.06 | 1.04 | 1.01 | 1.01 | ||||
|
| MB1 | DZ | 0.92 | 0.83 | 0.73 | 0.79 | 0.83 | 0.78 | ||
| SZ | 1.05 | 0.94 | 0.72 | 0.84 | 0.96 | 0.94 | ||||
| MB2 | DZ | 0.85 | 0.81 | 0.72 | 0.85 | 0.79 | 0.77 | |||
| SZ | 0.86 | 0.87 | 0.84 | 0.93 | 0.83 | 0.88 | ||||
Previous studies investigating the incidence of the MB2 canal of maxillary molars.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Zhang et al.3 | CBCT | 509 | Chinese | 52% | 22% | - | |
| Pattanshetti et al.4 | Loupe | 110 | Kuwait | 42.3% | - | - | |
| Schwarze et al.5 | Dental microscope | 100 | German | 92.3% | 95.8% | - | |
| Blattner et al.6 | Section analysis | 20 | American | - | - | 68.4% | |
| Wasti et al.7 | Clearing | 30 | Pakistanis | 47% | - | - | |
| Tuncer et al.8 | Dental microscope | 110 | Turkish | - | - | 78% | |
| Degerness et al.9 | Section analysis | 153 | American | 79.8% | 60.3% | - | |
| Lima et al. 10 | Section analysis | 72 | Brazilian | 78.9% | 52.9% | - | |
| Kim et al. 11 | CBCT | 1400 | Korean | 63.59% | 34.39% | - | |
| Tian et al.12 | CBCT | 3097 | Chinese | 57.8% | 29.7% | - | |
| Guo et al.13 | CBCT | 637 | American | 65.6% | - | - | |
| Ghobashy et al.14 | CBCT | 1215 | Egyptian | 74.55% | 57.94% | - | |
| Shetty et al.15 | CBCT | 100 | Indian | 86.3% | 29.4% | - | |
| Altunsoy et al.17 | CBCT | 2462 | Turkish | 62% | 37% | - | |
| Çalışkan et al.18 | Clearing | 200 | Turkish | 65% | 55% | - | |
| Rwenyonyi et al.19 | Clearing | 442 | Ugandan | 24.4% | 13.5% | - | |
| Šutalo20 | Section analysis | 443 | Croatian | 82.62% | - | - | |
| Yamada et al.21 | Micro-CT | 90 | Japanese | 55.6% | - | - | |
| Peeters et al.22 | Section analysis | 308 | Indonesian | 68.5% | - | - | |
| Our results | CBCT | 1251 | Turkish | 61.68% | 39.36% | ||