Evaluation of Quality of Endodontic Re-Treatment and Changes in Periapical Status

Background:

The present study was conducted to assess quality of root canal (RC) filling before and after RC re-treatment.

Materials and Methods:

Two hundred and thirty-eight radiographs of failed endodontic treatment were assessed. The periapical status of the endodontic treatment was evaluated with periapical index (PAI) scoring system. PAI <3 showed absence and PAI >3 showed presence of periapical lesion.

Results:

There was a statistically significant increase in scores 1 and 3 and decrease in scores 2, 4, 5, and 6 after treatment (P < 0.05). PAI score >3 was seen in 37% before which decreased to 16% after endodontic retreatment. 34.6% obturation was homogenous and 65.4% was nonhomogenous before endodontic retreatment. After endodontic retreatment, 95.2% became homogenous and 4.8% nonhomogenous. The reason for endodontic failure was furcation in 2%, iatrogenic causes in 3%, loss of coronal seal in 16%, periapical pathology in 25%, and inadequate root filling in 54%.

Conclusion:

There was significant improvement and decrease in size of periapical lesions in re-endodontic cases as compared to primary RC treated teeth.

Assessment of the quality of endodontic re-treatment and changes in periapical status on a postgraduate endodontic clinic

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to assess endodontic retreatment outcomes based on quality of obturation and healing.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total number of 223 radiographs of patients who had received endodontic retreatment during the period (2008-2015) at a postgraduate teaching clinic were selected. Unreadable radiographs were all excluded. From the original sample of 223 in total 24 radiographs were discarded. The final sample thus consisted of 199 root canal fillings. All radiographs were individually evaluated for the density of the root filling as well as the distance between the end of the root canal filling and radiographic apex based on a six-point scoring system. Subsequently, patients were reviewed and follow up periapical radiographs were exposed. The outcome of healing was assessed using the Periapical Index (PAI) scoring system. The data were analysed using Chi Square test (p < 0.05).

RESULTS

The study revealed that 78.9 % of the endodontic retreatments were both homogeneity and length acceptable. The corresponding figure was only 13.1 % before endodontic retreatment. Conversely, homogeneity and length unacceptable before endodontic retreatment was 47.2 % reducing to a mere 2.5 % after retreatment. The results were statistically significant (P < 0.001). There was over 80 % improvement in periapical healing following endodontic retreatment and this was also statistically significant (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

There was a significant improvement in outcome after endodontic retreatment on the postgraduate endodontic clinic. The success rate of endodontic retreatment was over 70 % which is in line with the endodontic literature. Radiographic follow up confirmed some 81 % improvement in healing rate following endodontic retreatment.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Endodontic re-treatment cases are normally categorised as high complexity and as such referral to specialist settings should be considered to help improve treatment outcomes.