The Relationship Between Crown Shape and Root Canal Morphology of Maxillary Second Molars in an Iraqi Sub-population Using Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT)

Volume 11 , Issue 1 , April 2024 , Pages 10-17

Authors

Rawa O. Ibrahim 1

1 Conservative Department, College of Dentistry, University of Sulaimani, Sulaimani, Iraq.

DOI logo 10.17656/sdj.10182

Keywords

Abstract

Objective: This study aimed to look into how crown shape affected the architecture of the root canals.
Methods: Nine hundred and fifty-four CBCT scans of maxillary second molars were evaluated. The relation between the crown shape and sex, root number, and root canals was determined. The frequency of the second canal in the mesiobuccal root (MB2), its age relation, and the symmetry of the concurrence of anatomical variations in contralateral molars were analyzed. The chi-square test was used for the analysis of the outcomes. It was deemed significant at P< 0.05.
Results: Overall, rhomboidal-shaped crowns comprised 60.1% of all crowns, while heart-shaped crowns made up 39.9%. Three-rooted teeth were the most common (74.5%), followed by two-rooted teeth (11.9%) and one-rooted teeth (8.5%), while four-rooted teeth made up only 5% of all samples. The most prevalent result in terms of the canal number was three canals (67%), followed by four canals (24.8%), two canals (7.3%), one canal (0.6%), and five canals (0.4%). Males were less likely to have crowns with a heart-shaped structure than females. The rhomboidal crown (22%) had a higher occurrence of MB2 canals when compared to the heart-shaped crown (2.8%).
Conclusions: Given the constraints of this research, it would seem that the rhomboid form of the upper second molar crown is more prevalent, with a greater tendency to have three and four roots and the presence of MB2 than the heart-shaped form.

References

  1. Alfouzan K, Alfadley A, Alkadi L, Alhezam A, Jamleh A. Detecting the Second Mesiobuccal Canal in Maxillary Molars in a Saudi Arabian Population: A Micro-CT Study. Scanning. 2019;2019:9568307.
  2. Lee JH, Kim KD, Lee JK, Park W, Jeong JS, Lee Y, et al. Mesiobuccal root canal anatomy of Korean maxillary first and second molars by cone-beam computed tomography. Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology, oral radiology, and endodontics. 2011;111(6):785-91.
  3. Ahmad IA, Al-Jadaa A. Three root canals in the mesiobuccal root of maxillary molars: case reports and literature review. J Endod. 2014;40(12):2087-94.
  4. Vizzotto MB, Da Silveira PF, Liedke GS, Arus NA, Montagner F, Silveira HLD, et al. Diagnostic reproducibility of the second mesiobuccal canal by CBCT: influence of potential factors. Oral Radiol. 2015;31(3):160-4.
  5. Dibaji F, Shariati R, Moghaddamzade B, Mohammadian F, Sooratgar A, Kharazifard M. Evaluation of the relationship between buccolingual width of mesiobuccal root and root canal morphology of maxillary first molars by cone-beam computed tomography. Dent Res J. 2022;19(1):5.
  6. Kim KR, Song JS, Kim S-O, Kim SH, Park W, Son H-K. Morphological changes in the crown of mandibular molars with an additional distolingual root. Arch Oral Biol. 2013;58(3):248-53.
  7. Aydın H. Relationship between crown and root canal anatomy of four-rooted maxillary molar teeth. Aust Endod J. 2021;47(2):298-306.
  8. Ghamari M, Mollashahi NF, Salarpour M, Mousavi E, Kazemian K, Moudi E, et al. Evaluation of the relationship between crown size and root canal morphology of mandibular incisors by cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). Electronic physician. 2017;9(8):5001-7.
  9. GS R. Textbook of Dental Anatomy, Physiology and Occlusion. second edition ed. Victoria Street, London: Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers; 2014.
  10. Nelson, Stanley J. Wheeler's Dental Anatomy, Physiology and Occlusion: 1st SAE-E-book. Elsevier Health Sciences; 2015.
  11. Olczak K, Pawlicka H. The morphology of maxillary first and second molars analyzed by cone-beam computed tomography in a polish population. BMC medical imaging. 2017;17(1):68.
  12. Reis AG, Grazziotin-Soares R, Barletta FB, Fontanella VR, Mahl CR. Second canal in mesiobuccal root of maxillary molars is correlated with root third and patient age: a cone-beam computed tomographic study. J Endod. 2013;39(5):588-92.
  13. Wu D, Zhang G, Liang R, Zhou G, Wu Y, Sun C, et al. Root and canal morphology of maxillary second molars by cone-beam computed tomography in a native Chinese population. J Int Med Res. 2017;45(2):830-42.
  14. Şımşek N, Keleş A, Bulut ET. Unusual Root Canal Morphology of the Maxillary Second Molar: A Case Report. Case Rep Dent. 2013;2013:138239.
  15. Suresh M, Karthikeyan K, Mahalaxmi S. Maxillary Second Molar with Fused Root and Six Canals- A Case Report. J Clin Diagn Res. 2017;11(4):35-7.
  16. Rosen E, Taschieri S, Del Fabbro M, Beitlitum I, Tsesis I. The diagnostic efficacy of cone-beam computed tomography in endodontics: a systematic review and analysis by a hierarchical model of efficacy. J Endod. 2015;41(7):1008-14.
  17. Zheng QH, Wang Y, Zhou XD, Wang Q, Zheng GN, Huang DM. A cone-beam computed tomography study of maxillary first permanent molar root and canal morphology in a Chinese population. J Endod. 2010;36(9):1480-4.
  18. Rouhani A, Bagherpour A, Akbari M, Azizi M, Nejat A, Naghavi N. Cone-beam computed tomography evaluation of maxillary first and second molars in Iranian population: a morphological study. Iran Endod J. 2014;9(3):190-4.
  19. Alamri HM, Mirza MB, Riyahi AM, Alharbi F, Aljarbou F. Root canal morphology of maxillary second molars in a Saudi sub-population: A cone beam computed tomography study. Saudi Dent J. 2020;32(5):250-4.
  20. Neelakantan P, Subbarao C, Ahuja R, Subbarao CV, Gutmann JL. Cone-Beam Computed Tomography Study of Root and Canal Morphology of Maxillary First and Second Molars in an Indian Population. J Endod. 2010;36(10):1622-7.
  21. Abdalrahman K, Talabani R, Kazzaz S, Babarasul D. Assessment of c-shaped canal morphology in mandibular and maxillary second molars in an iraqi subpopulation using cone-beam computed tomography. Scanning. 2022;2022:4886993.
  22. Ghasemi N, Rahimi S, Shahi S, Samiei M, Frough Reyhani M, Ranjkesh B. A review on root anatomy and canal configuration of the maxillary second molars. Iran Endod J. 2017;12(1):1-9.
  23. Betancourt P, Navarro P, Muñoz G, Fuentes R. Prevalence and location of the secondary mesiobuccal canal in 1,100 maxillary molars using cone beam computed tomography. BMC Medical Imaging. 2016;16(1):66.
  24. Zhang Q, Chen H, Fan B, Fan W, Gutmann JL. Root and root canal morphology in maxillary second molar with fused root from a native Chinese population. J Endod. 2014;40(6):871-5.
  25. Lin YH, Lin HN, Chen CC, Chen MS. Evaluation of the root and canal systems of maxillary molars in Taiwanese patients: A cone beam computed tomography study. Biomed J. 2017;40(4):232-8.
  26. Neaverth EJ, Kotler LM, Kaltenbach RF. Clinical investigation (in vivo) of endodontically treated maxillary first molars. J Endod. 1987;13(10):506-12.
  27. Ghobashy AM, Nagy MM, Bayoumi AA. Evaluation of root and canal morphology of maxillary permanent molars in an Egyptian population by cone-beam computed tomography. J Endod. 2017;43(7):1089-92.
Statistics
  • Article view736
  • Downloads3
  • Published at1 April 2024

  • RIS
  • BibTeX
  • EndNote
  • Mendeley
  • APA (7th edition)
  • MLA (9th edition)
  • Chicago
  • Harvard
  • IEEE
  • Vancouver