Periapical Microsurgery: Do Root Canal–retreated Teeth Have More Dentinal Defects?

Topography of root-end surface after freehand and three-dimensional-guided apicoectomy procedure: A scanning electron microscope study

Background

Dentinal microcracks formed during apical resection may lead to increased susceptibility to root fracture and improper sealing of apical preparation that may negatively influence the outcome of endodontic microsurgery.

Aims

This study was performed to analyze the root-end surface for dentinal microcracks using a scanning electron microscope (SEM) after resection with high-speed bur and trephine drill.

Materials and Methods

Thirty extracted single-rooted maxillary premolar teeth were selected and randomly distributed into two groups (n = 15). Working length was established using a #15 K-type file. Canals were prepared with a rotary Ni-Ti system to size 30/0.06 using endomotor, irrigated with 3% sodium hypochlorite, dried with paper points, and obturated with gutta-percha cones using a single-cone technique. All samples were mounted on preformed molds and poured using a mixture of sawdust and gypsum. In Group A; tungsten carbide bur was used to perform a freehand apicoectomy. In Group B; a trephine drill was used with a three-dimensional guide to perform 3 mm of root resection. Apicoectomy was performed in both groups under a dental operating microscope. Resected root ends were inspected for microcracks using SEM. The Shapiro-Wilk and Mann-Whitney U-test were used for statistical analysis.

Results

Microcracks were observed in all samples in both study groups. Trephine drill produced more microcracks on the resected root surface compared to the use of high-speed tungsten carbide bur with a statistically significant difference (P < 0.05).

Conclusions

The trephine drill used during targeted endodontic microsurgery produced more microcracks on the resected root dentine surface compared to the high-speed tungsten carbide bur used during freehand apicoectomy.

Occurrence of Vertical Root Fractures after Apical Surgery: A Retrospective Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Vertical root fractures (VRFs) are among the most frequent causes of tooth loss, mainly of endodontically treated teeth. However, very few data is available about the occurrence of VRFs following apical surgery.

METHODS

Patient charts from 864 patients with 1058 teeth treated with apical surgery (September 1999 to December 2018) were retrospectively evaluated, if a VRF had occurred after surgery. The following, possibly influencing factors were analyzed: sex and age, type of treated tooth, primary versus resurgery, technique of root-end preparation, and timepoint of VRF diagnosis. Endpoints were either tooth extraction or the last follow-up.

RESULTS

The study cohort (55% women, 45% men) had a mean age of 52.00 ± 13.97 years (range 9-93 years). The overall rate of VRFs after apical surgery was 4% (42 of 1058 teeth). Among these 42 teeth, 33.3% were mandibular first molars and 26.2% were maxillary second premolars. The most frequently affected root was the mesial root of mandibular first molars (28.6%). With regard to the study parameters, significant differences of VRF rates were observed only for the type of tooth treated.

CONCLUSIONS

A low VRF rate of 4% was observed in this study. VRFs commonly occurred in maxillary premolars and mandibular molars, with the mesial root of mandibular first molars affected most frequently. This is in line with previous reports about VRFs in endodontically treated teeth without additional apical surgery.

Effects of Dimensions of Root-End Fillings and Peripheral Root Dentine on the Healing Outcome of Apical Surgery

Objective:

The objective of this study was to assess dimensions of root-end fillings (REFs), as well as peripheral root dentine (PRD) and their effects on the healing outcome of apical surgery.

Methods:

Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans were utilized to measure the REF length and width and the PRD thickness in 61 roots of 53 teeth 1 year after apical surgery. Measurements were taken in the mesio-distal as well as bucco-lingual directions. The REF alignment with respect to the root axis was also evaluated. In addition, the dimensions of REF and PRD were assessed for possible correlations with the healing outcome. Criteria for determining the healing outcome included clinical and radiographic parameters.

Results:

The mean REF length was 2.02±0.52 mm. No significant differences were observed with regard to tooth groups, but one-canal roots had a significantly longer mean REF than two-canal roots (P=0.006). The mean REF widths were 1.14±0.24 mm mesio-distally and 2.61±1.24 mm bucco-lingually. Roots with two canals presented a significantly wider REF (P<0.001) in the bucco-lingual dimension but had a significantly narrower REF in the mesio-distal direction (P<0.001) compared to roots with single canals. PRD measured on average 1.19±0.23 mm at the resection level and 1.44±0.27 mm at the coronal end of the REF. Almost all REFs were perfectly aligned with the longitudinal axis of the roots. With regard to healing outcomes, no correlations were found with REF and PRD values, respectively.

Conclusion:

The mean REF length was 2.02 mm. On average, a thickness >1 mm of peripheral root dentine was maintained. The REF or PRD dimensions had no statistical effect on the healing outcome.