| Literature DB >> 35429982 |
Yeqing Yang1,2, Chong Jiang3, Ming Chen4, Junkai Zeng2, Buling Wu5,6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) was used to study the root canal system of mandibular anteriors (MAs) in a Cantonese population and to evaluate the correlation between the complicated root canal configurations of mandibular lateral incisors (MLIs) and the presence of distolingual roots (DLRs) in mandibular first molars (MFMs).Entities:
Keywords: Cone-beam computed tomography; Distolingual roots; Mandibular anteriors; Vertucci’s root canal configuration
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35429982 PMCID: PMC9013457 DOI: 10.1186/s12903-022-02078-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Oral Health ISSN: 1472-6831 Impact factor: 3.747
Fig. 1Representative images of root canal configurations of MLIs and the presence or absence of DLRs in MFMs. a Both MLIs were single root canal. b Right side or left side was single root canal. c Both MLIs were complicated root canals. d DLRs were found in both MFMs (Bil-DLR). e DLR was found in right side or left side MFM (Uni-DLR). f No DLR was found in both MFMs (Non-DLR)
Fig. 2The root canal configuration of MAs were classified according to the Vertucci classification, Vertucci Supplementary classification and a new classification system given by Karobari et al.
Characteristics of the study Cantonese population of the teeth
| Number of patients | Age(years) | Number of teeth (n) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| n(%) | Mean ± SD | Max | Min | MLIs | MFMs | |
| Female | 1016(53.59%) | 41.22 ± 12.23 | 72 | 18 | 2032 | 2032 |
| Male | 880(46.41%) | 40.56 ± 14.56 | 70 | 18 | 1760 | 1760 |
| Total | 1896(100.00%) | 40.86 ± 13.77 | 72 | 18 | 3792 | 3792 |
Incidence of different root canal morphologies of mandibular anterior
| Vertucci’s classification | Number of specimens n(%) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 33 | 32 | 31 | 41 | 42 | 43 | |
| Type I(1-1) | 1750 (92.30%) | 1312 (69.20%) | 1754 (92.51%) | 1750 (92.30%) | 1308 (68.99%) | 1756 (92.62%) |
| Type II(2-1) | 2 (0.11%) | 6 (0.32%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 6 (0.32%) | 0 (0.00%) |
| Type III(1-2-1) | 124 (6.54%) | 554 (29.22%) | 136 (7.17%) | 140 (7.38%) | 554 (29.22%) | 129 (6.80%) |
| Type IV(2-2) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 2 (0.11%) | 0 (0.00%) |
| Type V(1-2) | 16 (0.84%) | 24 (1.27%) | 6 (0.32%) | 6 (0.32%) | 26 (1.37%) | 8 (0.42%) |
| Type VI(2-1-2) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) |
| Type VII(1-2-1-2) | 2 (0.11%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) |
| Type VIII (3-3) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) |
| Type XVIII (2-1-2-1) | 2 (0.11%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 2 (0.11%) |
| Type 1431-2-3-1 | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 0 (0.00%) | 1 (0.05%) |
| Total | 1896 | 1896 | 1896 | 1896 | 1896 | 1896 |
Type 1431-2-3-1 was an additional type; 31, left mandibular central incisor; 41, right mandibular central incisor; 32, left mandibular lateral incisor; 42, right mandibular lateral incisor; 33, left mandibular canine; 43, right mandibular canine
Incidence of the number of roots of mandibular anterior
| Number of roots | Number of specimens n(%) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 33 | 32 | 31 | 41 | 42 | 43 | |
| 1 | 1886 (99.47%) | 1896 (100.00%) | 1896 (100.00%) | 1896 (100.00%) | 1896 (100.00%) | 1892 (99.78%) |
| 2 | 10(0.52%) | 0(0.00%) | 0(0.00%) | 0(0.00%) | 0(0.00%) | 4(0.21%) |
Fig. 3Characteristics of the study population examined teeth by genders, age groups, and sides. a The distribution of MFMs with DLRs between males and females. b The distribution complicated root canal configurations of MLIs between males and females. c The distribution of MFMs with DLRs between different age groups. d The distribution complicated root canal configurations of MLIs between different age groups. e The distribution of MFMs with DLRs between sides. f The distribution complicated root canal configurations of MLIs between sides
Characteristics of the study population examined teeth by genders, age groups, and sides
| Number of specimens (n) | Number of specimens (n) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MLI | MFM | |||||
| Single | Complicated | Without DLR | With DLR | |||
| Total | 2620 | 1172 | 2904 | 888 | ||
| Sex | ||||||
| Female | 1430 | 602 | 1576 | 456 | ||
| Male | 1190 | 570 | 1328 | 432 | ||
| Side | ||||||
| Left | 1312 | 584 | 1475 | 421 | ||
| Right | 1308 | 588 | 1429 | 467 | ||
| Age | ||||||
| < 45 | 1762 | 996 | 2124 | 634 | ||
| ≥ 45 | 858 | 176 | 780 | 254 | ||
The level of statistical significance was set at P < 0.05. ****P < 0.0001
Analysis of the correlation of MFMs with DLRs and root canal configurations of MLIs ipsilaterally and contralaterally
| Number ofspecimens (n) | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MFM, Right | ||||||||
| Without DLR | With DLR | Total | ||||||
| MFM, Left | **** | |||||||
| Without DLR | 1300 | 175 | 1475 | |||||
| With DLR | 129 | 292 | 421 | |||||
| Total | 1429 | 467 | 1896 | |||||
The level of statistical significance was set at P < 0.05. **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001, ****P < 0.0001