The Prevalence of Root Resorption in a Sample of Orthodontic Patients Treated in Private Clinics in Sulaimani City/ A Retrospective Study

Volume 11 , Issue 1 , April 2024 , Pages 27-38

Authors

Sana T. Omer 1 ; Adham A. Abdulrahman 1

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

DOI logo 10.17656/sdj.10184

Keywords

Abstract

Objective: Root resorption is an inevitable consequence of orthodontic treatment. This retrospective study aimed to determine the prevalence of root resorption secondary to orthodontic treatment in private clinics in Sulaimani City, Iraq and to compare the difference in the amount of root resorption between varying teeth, regions of the mouth, and the upper and lower arches in order to lessen or eliminate unsolicited and undue impediments.
Methods: Among the 465 cases with available data, treated in private clinics of the participating practitioners, only 92 were fully eligible for study. Pre-operative lateral cephalograms were measured using Eastman Analysis on WebCeph. A customized frame was created on AutoCAD and pre and post-operative orthopantomograms were measured for root resorption only if they fitted into the frame. Intra and inter-observer reliability were performed to ensure optimal accuracy in the measurements. The millimeter measurements of root resorption were converted into percentages to identify the prevalence of root resorption in Sulaimani City.
Results: The root resorption in the different individual teeth resulted in a significant relationship with orthodontic treatment. Factors such as age, gender, and duration of treatment were not significantly associated with root resorption. The results of the upper and lower arches indicated no significant differences between the arches. The incisors showed more significant resorption when compared to
canines.
Conclusions: Orthodontic treatment affects the prevalence and severity of root resorption. Age, gender, and duration of treatment have no significant relation with apical root resorption. Different regions of the mouth encounter varying degrees of apical root resorption. Even in the anterior teeth, incisors are more prone to resorption than canines.

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 Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 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). Electron Physician. 2017;9(8):5001-7.
  9. Rai GS. Textbook of Dental Anatomy, Physiology and Occlusion. 2nd ed. London: Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers; 2014.
  10. Nelson SJ. Wheeler's Dental Anatomy, Physiology and Occlusion. 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 Med 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):ZD35-7.
  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 an 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 Med 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 view661
  • Downloads2
  • Published at1 April 2024

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