Nonsurgical endodontic retreatment of maxillary second molar with two palatal root canals: a case report

Maxillary First Molars with Two Palatal Root Canals

Understanding the anatomical variations in the roots and root canal systems of a tooth is important for the success of root canal treatment. The palatal roots of the maxillary molars have fewer anatomical variations than the other roots, and fewer variations occur in the first molars than in the second molars. This case report describes two distinct cases of maxillary first molars with two palatal canals. For the root canal treatment of teeth with anatomical variations, it is essential to plan specific treatment strategies using cone-beam computed tomography and to execute them using a dental operating microscope. Knowledge of the anatomical variations in the palatal roots of maxillary first molars will help to increase the success rate of root canal treatments.

A Rare Root Canal Configuration of a Maxillary Second Molar with Fused C-shaped Buccal Root and Five Canals: A Case Report and Review of literature

Having a thorough knowledge of root canal configuration is essential for a successful endodontic treatment. Clinicians should always pay attention to the unusual canal configuration so as to avoid missing extra canals. This paper describes a non-surgical retreatment of a maxillary second molar with two missing root canals; diagnosed by cone-beam computed tomographic (CBCT) imaging. The tooth had three roots and five canals: a C-shaped buccal root fused by mesiobuccal (MB) and distobuccal (DB) roots with three canals (CBCT scanning showed that the second MB canal was closer to the palatal than the buccal side), a mesiopalatal root with one canal, and a distopalatal root with one canal. The purpose of this case report is to remind clinicians of the importance of anatomical variations, and thus, detection of extra canals.

Management of a failed endodontic treatment for a maxillary second molar with two separate palatal roots

Complexity of root canal system and variations in internal anatomy of teeth require careful analysis of preoperative cone beam computed tomography or multiangle radiographs to locate and identify possible extra roots or canals. A fourth canal in upper molars is expected, and much effort should be made when planning the endodontic treatment to avoid missing a canal.

Treatment of a Four-Rooted Maxillary Second Molar Detected with Cone-Beam Computed Tomography

The significance of clinician's knowledge about root canal anatomy and its possible variations cannot be overlooked. In some cases, taking advantage of complementary imaging techniques can help achieve a perfect flawless endodontic treatment. This article reports endodontic management of a second maxillary molar that had an uncommon anatomy of the chamber floor. After obtaining a cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) image, the presence of a second palatal root was confirmed. All four roots were treated and patient's symptoms were resolved.

Root Canal Treatment of a Maxillary Second Molar with Two Palatal Canals: a Case Report

Careful understanding of internal anatomy of root canal system is crucial for successful endodontic treatment. The presence of two palatal canals in maxillary second molar is unusual but noteworthy as an aid to appropriate diagnosis and treatment. This paper reported a case of a maxillary right second molar with two root canals in the palatal root. The root canal treatment and case management were also explained.

Treatment time for non-surgical endodontic therapy with or without a magnifying loupe

BACKGROUND

Use of magnifying loupe may increase the efficiency of dental care. This clinical trial compared the time in performing non-surgical endodontic therapy with or without the use of a magnifying loupe.

METHODS

Patients who required primary endodontic treatment in clinical trial centres at the University of Hong Kong (HKU) in Hong Kong and Peking University (PKU) in Beijing were invited to participate in this study. Two HKU dentists and 2 PKU dentists, forming 2 pairs of dentists with similar years of clinical experience, performed endodontic treatments according to the same procedures and used the same materials, either in single or multiple visits. They had no prior experience with the use of a magnifying loupe. One dentist from each pair was trained to use a magnifying loupe (x2.5). The treatment time was recorded.

RESULTS

Eighty-four PKU patients with a mean age of 42.8 years and 98 HKU patients with a mean age of 46.0 years were recruited in this study. Ninety-six teeth were treated with a magnifying loupe and 86 teeth were treated without a magnifying loupe. The results showed that treatment time was not associated with age, gender, tooth vitality, or the presence of apical radiolucency or sinus tract. The results of ANCOVA revealed the treatment time was associated with the clinic (HKU or PKU), root canal system (single or multiple), presence of preoperative pain, treatment visit (single or multiple), the use of a magnifying loupe, and the experience of the operator.

CONCLUSION

In this study, the use of a magnifying loupe could significantly reduce the endodontic treatment time.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical Trials ChiCTR-IOR-15005988 registered 15 February 2015.