Seçilen bir Türk popülasyonunda koni-ışınlı bilgisayarlı tomografi kullanılarak mandibular birinci ve ikinci premolarların kök kanal morfolojisi ve literatür taraması

Yıl 2022, Cilt: 9 Sayı: 2, 540 - 546, 24.08.2022

Nilay Ezentaş , Emel Uzunoğlu Özyürek

https://doi.org/10.15311/selcukdentj.787989

Öz

Amaç: Seçilen bir popülasyonda konik-ışınlı bilgisayarlı tomografi (KIBT) kullanarak kalıcı mandibular premolarların kök kanal morfolojisini incelemek ve seçilmiş Türk alt popülasyonları ile ilgili önceki çalışmaları gözden geçirmektir.
Gereç ve Yöntemler: Bu retrospektif çalışmanın örneklemi, 1613 mandibular birinci ve 1461 ikinci küçük azı dişine sahip 672 kadın ve 376 erkeğin toplam 1048 KIBT görüntüsünü içermektedir. Literatür taraması Pubmed ve Google Scholar veri tabanlarında seçilen anahtar kelimelerle yapılmıştır.
Bulgular: Mandibular birinci ve ikinci premolarlarda tek kök görülme sıklığı sırasıyla %99,75 ve%99,38 idi. Karmaşık kök kanal anatomisi, ikinci premolarlara göre birinci premolarlarda ve erkeklerde kadınlara göre daha belirgindi (p <0,05). Daha önceki 8 çalışma diğer Türk alt popülasyonlarının mandibular premolarlarının kök kanal anatomisini şeffaflaştırma veya KIBT görüntüleri ile değerlendirmiştir. Bu çalışmalarda 2 veya daha fazla kök kanalının prevalansı mandibular birinci premolarlarda %5,80-%39,50 arasında ve mandibular ikinci premolarlarda ise %1,1-% 29 arasında bulunmuştur.
Sonuç: Özellikle erkek hastalarda mandibular premolarların kök kanal tedavisi sırasında ek kanalların tespitine daha fazla dikkat edilmelidir. Küçük azıların simetrik morfolojisi, kök kanal tedavisi sırasında hekimlere yol gösterebilir. Değerlendirme yöntemleri kök kanal anatomisi sonuçlarını etkileyebilir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Alt çene, küçük azı, konik ışınlı bilgisayarlı tomografi, retrospektif çalışmalar

Root canal morphology of mandibular first and second premolars using cone-beam computed tomography in a selected Turkish-population and literature review

Öz

Objectives: To investigate the root canal morphology of permanent mandibular premolars using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) in the selected population and to review previous studies regarding other selected Turkish subpopulations.
Materials and Methods: The sample for this retrospective study included 1048 CBCT images of 672 females and 376 males representing 1613 mandibular first and 1461 second premolars. Pubmed and Google Scholar were used to search previous literature with selected keywords.
Results: The incidence of single root in mandibular first and second premolars was 99.75% and 99.38%, respectively. Complex root canal anatomy was evident in the first premolars compared to second premolars and in males than females (p<0.05). Eight studies have previously evaluated the root canal anatomy of mandibular premolars of other Turkish subpopulations by clearing or CBCT images. The prevalence of 2 or more root canals was found between 5.80% - 39.50% in mandibular first premolars and 1.1% -29% in mandibular second premolars in these studies.
Conclusions: More attention should be paid to the detection of additional canals during root canal treatment of mandibular premolars, especially in male patients. The symmetrical morphology of the premolars may guide the practitioners during the root canal treatment. Evaluation methods could affect the results regarding root canal anatomy.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Bicuspid, Cone-Beam Computed Tomography, Mandible, Retrospective Studies

Kaynakça

• 1. Ng Y-L, Mann V, Gulabivala K. A prospective study of the factors affecting outcomes of nonsurgical root canal treatment: part 1: periapical health. Int Endod J 2011;44:583-609.
• 2. Estrela C, Holland R, Estrela CR, Alencar AH, Sousa-Neto MD, Pécora JD. Characterization of successful root canal treatment. Braz Dent J 2014;25:3-11.
• 3. Hülsmann M, Peters OA, Dummer PMH. Mechanical preparation of root canals: shaping goals, techniques and means. Endod Topics 2005;10:30–76.
• 4. Hoen MM, Pink FE. Contemporary endodontic retreatments: an analysis based on clinical treatment findings. J Endod 2002;28:834-6.
• 5. Albuquerque D, Kottoor J, Hammo M. Endodontic and clinical considerations in the management of variable anatomy in mandibular premolars: a literature review. Biomed Res Int 2014;2014:512574.
• 6. Mittal S, Kumar T, Mittal S, Sharma J. Mandibular premolars with aberrant canal morphology: An endodontic challenge. J Conserv Dent 2014;17:491-4.
• 7. Vaghela DJ, Sinha AA. Endodontic management of four rooted mandibular first premolar. J Conserv Dent 2013;16:87-9.
• 8. Dalili Kajan Z, Taramsari M, Khosravi Fard N, Kanani M. Accuracy of Cone-beam Computed Tomography in Comparison with Standard Method in Evaluating Root Canal Morphology: An In Vitro Study. Iran Endod J 2018;13:181-7.
• 9. Ordinola-Zapata R, Bramante CM, Versiani MA, Moldauer BI, Topham G, Gutmann JL, Nuñez A, Duarte MA, Abella F. Comparative accuracy of the Clearing Technique, CBCT and Micro-CT methods in studying the mesial root canal configuration of mandibular first molars. Int Endod J 2017;50:90-6.
• 10. Khademi A, Mehdizadeh M, Sanei M, Sadeqnejad H, Khazaei S. Comparative evaluation of root canal morphology of mandibular premolars using clearing and cone beam computed tomography. Dent Res J (Isfahan) 2017;14:321-5.
• 11. Neelakantan P, Subbarao C, Subbarao CV. Comparative evaluation of modified canal staining and clearing technique, cone-beam computed tomography, peripheral quantitative computed tomography, spiral computed tomography, and plain and contrast medium-enhanced digital radiography in studying root canal morphology. J Endod 2010;36:1547-51.
• 12. Zhang D, Chen J, Lan G, Li M, An J, Wen X, Liu L, Deng M. The root canal morphology in mandibular first premolars: a comparative evaluation of cone-beam computed tomography and micro-computed tomography. Clin Oral Investig 2017;21:1007-12.
• 13. Kartal N, Yanikoğlu F. The incidence of mandibular premolars with more than one root canal in a Turkish population. J Marmara Univ Dent Fac 1992;1:203-10.
• 14. Calişkan MK, Pehlivan Y, Sepetçioğlu F, Türkün M, Tuncer SS. Root canal morphology of human permanent teeth in a Turkish population. J Endod 1995;21:200-4.
• 15. Sert S, Bayirli GS. Evaluation of the root canal configurations of the mandibular and maxillary permanent teeth by gender in the Turkish population. J Endod 2004;30:391-8.
• 16. Sert S, Aslanalp V, Tanalp J. Investigation of the root canal configurations of mandibular permanent teeth in the Turkish population. Int Endod J 2004;37:494-9.
• 17. Ok E, Altunsoy M, Nur BG, Aglarci OS, Çolak M, Güngör E. A cone-beam computed tomography study of root canal morphology of maxillary and mandibular premolars in a Turkish population. Acta Odontol Scand 2014;72:701-6.
• 18. Arslan H, Capar ID, Ertas ET, Ertas H, Akcay M. A cone-beam computed tomographic study of root canal systems in mandibular premolars in a Turkish population: Theoretical model for determining orifice shape. Eur J Dent 2015;9:11-9.
• 19. Bulut DG, Kose E, Ozcan G, Sekerci AE, Canger EM, Sisman Y. Evaluation of root morphology and root canal configuration of premolars in the Turkish individuals using cone beam computed tomography. Eur J Dent 2015;9:551-7.
• 20. Celikten B, Orhan K, Aksoy U, Tufenkci P, Kalender A, Basmaci F, Dabaj P. Cone-beam CT evaluation of root canal morphology of maxillary and mandibular premolars in a Turkish Cypriot population. BDJ Open 2016;2:15006.
• 21. Kaya Büyükbayram I, Sübay RK, Çolakoğlu G, Elçin MA, Ordulu Sübay M. Investigation using cone beam computed tomography analysis, of radicular grooves and canal configurations of mandibular premolars in a Turkish subpopulation. Arch Oral Biol 2019;107:104517.
• 22. Martins JNR, Gu Y, Marques D, Francisco H, Caramês J. Differences on the Root and Root Canal Morphologies between Asian and White Ethnic Groups Analyzed by Cone-beam Computed Tomography. J Endod 2018;44:1096-104.
• 23. Martins JNR, Marques D, Francisco H, Caramês J. Gender influence on the number of roots and root canal system configuration in human permanent teeth of a Portuguese subpopulation. Quintessence Int 2018;49:103-11.
• 24. Bürklein S, Heck R, Schäfer E. Evaluation of the Root Canal Anatomy of Maxillary and Mandibular Premolars in a Selected German Population Using Cone-beam Computed Tomographic Data. J Endod 2017;43:1448-52.
• 25. Vertucci FJ. Root canal anatomy of the human permanent teeth. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1984;58:589–99.
• 26. Mohammadi Z, Asgary S, Shalavi S, V Abbott P. A Clinical Update on the Different Methods to Decrease the Occurrence of Missed Root Canals. Iran Endod J 2016;11:208-13.
• 27. Tabassum S, Khan FR. Failure of endodontic treatment: The usual suspects. Eur J Dent 2016;10: 144-7.
• 28. Vertucci FJ. Root canal morphology and its relationship to endodontic procedures. Endod Topics 2005;10:3–29.
• 29. Wu YC, Su CC, Tsai YC, Cheng WC, Chung MP, Chiang HS, Hsieh CY, Chung CH, Shieh YS, Huang RY. Complicated root canal configuration of mandibular first premolars is correlated with the presence of the Distolingual root in mandibular first molars: a cone-beam computed tomographic study in Taiwanese individuals. J Endod 2017;43:1064–71.
• 30. Jang YE, Kim Y, Kim B, Kim SY, Kim HJ. Frequency of non-single canals in mandibular premolars and correlations with other anatomical variants: an in vivo cone beam computed tomography study. BMC Oral Health 2019;19:272.