Root and root canal morphology of the permanent dentition in a Caucasian population: a cone‐beam computed tomography study

Abstract

Clinicians must be aware that each tooth may display several types of root canal configuration. However, a greater variability in root canal configuration was found in maxillary second premolars and in the mesiobuccal roots of maxillary molars. Main root canal merging and splitting may also be expected to occur at any level of the root canal.

Evaluation of root canal morphology of maxillary premolars: a cone‐beam computed tomography study

“…These findings are in agreement with Ok et al (8). However, the percentage of the type I canal configuration was higher than that in other studies (9,11,19,20) (17%-45%). The discrepancy in the distribution of root forms among studies may be the result of differences in populations, evaluation techniques and/or sample size.…”

“…one root was found in 71.2% of maxillary second premolars (9,11,16,19,20) (Table 4). one root was found in 71.2% of maxillary second premolars (9,11,16,19,20) (Table 4).…”

Internal and external morphology of mandibular molars: An original micro‐CT study and meta‐analysis with review of implications for endodontic therapy

“…The characteristics of included studies are presented in Table . A total of 65 studies ( n = 23,846 teeth), including our original study, were considered eligible and were included in the meta‐analysis (Skidmore and Bjorndal, ; Pineda and Kuttler, ; Reichart and Metah, ; Vertucci, ; Walker and Quackenbush, ; Walker, ; Weine et al, ; Fabra‐Campos, ; Yew and Chan, ; Calişkan et al, ; Prakashchandra and Reddy, ; Kartal and Cimilli, ; Zaatar et al, ; Guerisoli et al, ; Sperber and Moreau, ; al‐Nazhan, ; Sidow et al, ; Gulabivala et al, ; Wasti et al, ; Duda et al, ; Sert and Bayirli, ; Sert et al, ; Zhang et al, ; Jung et al, ; von Arx, ; Ahmed et al, ; Peiris, ; Tu et al, ; Pattanshetti et al, ; Peiris et al, ; Rahimi et al, ; Al‐Qudah and Awawdeh, ; Chen et al, ; Rwenyonyi et al, ; Schäfer et al, ; Gu et al, ; Huang et al, ; Neelakantan et al, ; Wang et al, ; Bahammam and Bahammam, ; Cosić, ; Demirbuga et al, ; Jang et al, ; Silva et al, ; Khan et al, ; Lima et al, ; Caputo et al, ; Celikten et al, ; Kim et al, ; Min et al, ; Monsarrat et al, ; Wolf et al, ; Madani et al, ; Martins et al, ; Mohammadzadeh et al, ; Pawar et al, ; Pekiner et al, ; Pérez‐Heredia et al, ). There were 32 imaging studies, 31 cadaveric studies, and two intraoperative studies.…”

Differences on the Root and Root Canal Morphologies between Asian and White Ethnic Groups Analyzed by Cone-beam Computed Tomography

“…Another morphologic characteristic that is usually associated with Asian populations, with a traditionally higher prevalence when compared with other populations, is the presence of a second distal root in mandibular first molars. This anatomic feature prevalence may be as high as 22.3% in Korea (7), 25.6% in Taiwan (8), and 29.7% in China (9), whereas in other regions, it may be as low as 0.5% (Turkey) (10), 0.8% (Spain) (11), and 2.2% (Portugal) (12). Although this difference seems notorious, there is no available scientific study performed with calibrated observers from a single research group that compared both ethnic groups.…”