Search

Objectives: The aim of this clinical study was to evaluate and compare the incidence and intensity of postoperative pain following removal of gutta-percha from root canals using rotary and reciprocating instruments.Materials and methods: One hundred and sixty patients scheduled for a non-surgical endodontic retreatment were included for evaluation. Preoperative pain was recorded with using a questionnaire with a 10-cm visual analogical scale (VAS). Endodontic filling material was removed with Reciproc (VDW, Munich, Germany) or ProFile (Dentsply Tulsa Dental Specialties, Tulsa, OK) instruments. Patients then recorded their postoperative pain in a VAS pain scale at 4, 8, 16, 24, 48, and 72 h post-treatment. Results were analyzed using the Mann-Whitney U, Kruskal-Wallis, and Chi-square tests. Multivariate logistic and a multiple regression analysis were used to detect the effect of confounding factors.Results: Results showed a direct relation between the intensity of pre-operative pain and that of postoperative pain (P < .05). No significant differences were observed between the two groups regarding postoperative pain (P > .05) as a qualitative variable. As numerical values, statistically significant differences were found regarding sex and the system used (P < .05).Conclusions: The method for pain evaluation was determinant in postoperative pain findings. Endodontic retreatment preparation with Reciproc results in lower values of postoperative pain compared with ProFile. Women are more susceptible to postoperative pain than are men.Clinical relevance: One of the most significant contributions of this research is the importance given to the method used for pain evaluation. The present study analyzed postoperative pain resulting from the use of reciprocating or continuous rotary instruments during removal of gutta-percha in retreatment procedures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim To evaluate the presence or absence of periapical ( PA) radiolucencies on individual roots of teeth with necrotic pulps, as assessed with digital PA radiographs and cone-beam computed tomography ( CBCT). Methodology Digital PA radiographs and CBCT scans were taken from 161 endodontically untreated teeth (from 155 patients) diagnosed with non-vital pulps (pulp necrosis with normal PA tissue, symptomatic apical periodontitis, asymptomatic apical periodontitis, acute apical abscess and chronic apical abscess). Images were assessed by two calibrated endodontists to analyse the radiographic PA status of the teeth. A consensus was reached in the event of any disagreement. The data were analysed using a Mc Nemar's test, and significance was set at P ≤ 0.05. Results Three hundred and forty paired images of roots were assessed with both digital PA radiographs and CBCT images. Fifteen additional roots were identified with CBCT. PA radiolucencies were present in 132 (38.8%) roots when assessed with PA radiographs, and in 196 (57.6%) roots when assessed with CBCT. This difference was statistically significant ( P < 0.05). In teeth diagnosed with pulp necrosis, symptomatic apical periodontitis or acute apical abscess, CBCT images revealed a statistically larger number of PA radiolucencies than did PA radiographs ( P < 0.05). No statistical differences were observed between PA radiographs and CBCT in teeth classified with asymptomatic apical periodontitis ( P = 0.31) or chronic apical abscess ( P = 1). Conclusions Unlike PA radiographs, CBCT revealed a higher prevalence of PA radiolucencies when endodontically untreated teeth with non-vital pulps were examined. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abella F, Patel S, Durán-Sindreu F, Mercadé M, Roig M. Mandibular first molars with disto-lingual roots: review and clinical management. International Endodontic Journal, 45, 963-978, 2012. Abstract The purpose of this review was (i) to conduct a literature review on the prevalence and morphologic classification of mandibular first molars with disto-lingual (DL) roots, and (ii) to discuss the clinical approach to diagnosis and root canal treatment of these teeth. A search was carried out on electronic (MEDLINE, PubMed and Cochrane) and hand databases, which covered all publications from 1970 to December 2011. Two reviewers independently assessed the studies and recorded type of study, origin and sample sizes, number of teeth with three roots and type of root canal configuration. Forty-five studies were identified with a total of 19 056 mandibular first molar teeth. The frequency of DL roots was 14.4% and was associated with certain ethnic populations. The most common canal configuration of mesial and distal roots was Vertucci types IV and I, respectively. No significant differences were observed in the prevalence of DL roots according to gender. Variable results related to side were observed as well as a trend in bilateral occurrence. The root length of the DL roots was in general shorter than that of the disto-buccal roots (DB). Most DL roots had a greater angle of curvature and a smaller radius of curvature in a bucco-lingual orientation. The best methods to identify DL roots are a 25° mesial parallax periapical radiograph or cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). A trapezoidal shape access cavity is desirable to locate the orifice of the DL canal. Clinicians should be aware of the variable furcation levels during coronal pre-flaring or post-space preparation to avoid furcal/strip perforations and a weakening of DL roots. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: The aim of this report is to (i) review the current literature on the status of root filled teeth, (ii) analyse the most important factors in decision‐making, (iii) discuss the current restorative concepts, and (iv) classify both the evidence and clinical practice in a way that seeks to be clear, understandable and helpful for clinicians. Restoration of root filled teeth represents a challenge for the clinician and remains a controversial subject. The guidelines describe a new classification that is drawn from evidence presented in the literature and also from clinical expertise‐based reviews. It describes five categories of teeth. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]