Prevalence and morphological features of molar‐root incisor malformation in children attending a specialist paediatric dental unit

Abstract

BackgroundMolar‐root incisor malformation (MRIM) is a rare dental anomaly featuring constricted cervical margins and tapered, narrow root and pulp morphology, often associated with severe toothache and infection.AimThe aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of MRIM in children seen in a specialist paediatric dental unit of a tertiary referral hospital and to describe the characteristics of affected individuals.DesignThis study was an audit of children attending from November 2020 to November 2021. Radiographs were used to identify individuals with MRIM, and clinical data were collated. In addition, histology and microcomputed tomography (microCT) imaging were performed on teeth extracted from an affected individual.ResultsThe prevalence of MRIM was five cases of 1054 children examined (0.47% or 1:210). The permanent first molars were affected in all five children and the primary second molars in two children; all children had medical comorbidities and multiple exposures to general anesthesia before 4 years of age. In addition, histological and microCT analyses displayed numerous microchannels connecting the pulp chamber to the external surface of the tooth at the furcation.ConclusionsMolar‐root incisor malformation is an uncommon dental anomaly affecting paediatric patients with multiple comorbidities and is characterized by porosities extending from the pulp chamber to the external tooth surface, predisposing the risk of bacterial ingress from the oral cavity into the pulp chamber. Early detection may prevent atypical odontogenic facial pain and infection.

Interdisciplinary endodontic treatment of a Molar-Incisor Malformation-affected molar using a 3D printing model based on cone-beam computed tomography: A case report and literature review

“…clinical outcomes in all of treated teeth, positive radiographic outcomes in 85.7% of endodontically treated teeth (Table 3). Study ratings "Excellent" in 8 studies (32%) [11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18], "Fair" in 13 (52%) [2,[19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30], and "Poor" in 4 [31][32][33][34] (16%) (Table 4).…”