Search

Background: There is a high failure rate of endodontic treatment in the mandibular incisors due to insufficient knowledge of the morphology. Aim: The aim of this study was to analyze the root canal morphology in mandibular incisor teeth in the North Indian subpopulation to improve the outcome of endodontic treatment. Setting and Design: A cross-sectional study was conducted at the OPD of a tertiary care institute. Materials and Methods: A total of 200 mandibular central incisors and 200 mandibular lateral incisors were selected from available cone-beam computed tomography examinations of 100 patients aged 18–79 years. They were evaluated for root canal system configuration and symmetry between right and left elements in the same individual. Statistical Analysis: Chi-square/Fisher’s exact test was used to find the association between different study variables. Results: For mandibular central incisors, type I Vertucci classification was present in 69% of cases, type II in 3.5%, type III in 18.5%, type IV in 2%, and type V in 7% of cases. For mandibular lateral incisors, type I was present in 70.5% of cases, type II in 4% of cases, type III in 19.5%, type IV in 2%, and type V in 4% of cases. There was no evidence of types VI, VII, and VIII. Symmetry of root canal morphology between left and right teeth was observed in 90% of central incisors and 93% of lateral incisors. Conclusion: Type I Vertucci configuration was the most prevalent; however, the prevalence of other configurations is also evident. Therefore, endodontists should explore the morphology of these teeth carefully while performing root canal treatments.

Leonardo Kapural,1 Jim Melton,2 Billy Kim,3 Priyesh Mehta,4 Abindra Sigdel,5 Alexander Bautista,6 Erika A Petersen,7 Konstantin V Slavin,8,9 John Eidt,10 Jiang Wu,11 Said Elshihabi,12 Jason Matthew Schwalb,13 H Edward Garrett Jr,14 Elias Veizi,15 Giancarlo Barolat,16 Ravi R Rajani,17 Peter C Rhee,18 Maged Guirguis,19 Nagy Mekhail20 1Carolinas Pain Institute and Center for Clinical Research, Winston-Salem, NC, USA; 2Department of Vascular Surgery, Cardiovascular Health Clinic, Oklahoma City, OK, USA; 3Department of Vascular Surgery, The Surgical Clinic, Nashville, TN, USA; 4Department of Pain Medicine, Meta Medical Research Institute, Dayton, OH, USA; 5Department of Surgery, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY, USA; 6Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY, USA; 7Department of Neurosurgery, University of Arkansas, Little Rock, AR, USA; 8Department of Neurosurgery, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA; 9Department of Neurology, Jesse Brown VA Medical Center, Chicago, IL, USA; 10Department of Vascular Surgery, Baylor Scott and White Heart and Vascular Hospital Dallas, Dallas, TX, USA; 11Department of Anesthesiology & Pain Medicine, University of Washington Medical Center, Seattle, WA, USA; 12Department of Neurosurgery, Legacy Brain & Spine Surgical Center, Atlanta, GA, USA; 13Department of Neurosurgery, Henry Ford Medical Group, Detroit, MI, USA; 14Department of Vascular Surgery, University of Tennessee-Memphis, Memphis, TN, USA; 15Department of Pain Medicine, VA Northeast OH Healthcare System, Cleveland, OH, USA; 16Department of Neurosurgery, Barolat Neuroscience, Presbyterian/St Luke’s Medical Center, Denver, CO, USA; 17Department of Vascular Surgery, Emory University and Grady Memorial Hospital, Atlanta, GA, USA; 18Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA; 19Department of Interventional Pain Management, Ochsner Health System, New Orleans, LA, USA; 20Department of Pain Management, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USACorrespondence: Leonardo Kapural, Carolinas Pain Institute and Center for Clinical Research, 145 Kimel Park Dr #330, Winston-Salem, NC, 27103, USA, Email lkapuralmd@gmail.comPurpose: This multicenter, randomized, double-blinded, active sham-controlled pivotal study was designed to assess the efficacy and safety of high-frequency nerve block treatment for chronic post-amputation and phantom limb pain.Patients and Methods: QUEST enrolled 180 unilateral lower-limb amputees with severe post-amputation pain, 170 of whom were implanted with the Altius device, were randomized 1:1 to active-sham or treatment groups and reached the primary endpoint. Responders were those subjects who received ≥ 50% pain relief 30 min after treatment in ≥ 50% of their self-initiated treatment sessions within the 3-month randomized period. Differences between the active treatment and sham control groups as well as numerous secondary outcomes were determined.Results: At 30-min, (primary outcome), 24.7% of the treatment group were responders compared to 7.1% of the control group (p=0.002). At 120-minutes following treatment, responder rates were 46.8% in the Treatment group and 22.2% in the Control group (p=0.001). Improvement in Brief Pain Inventory interference score of 2.3 ± 0.29 was significantly greater in treatment group than the 1.3 ± 0.26-point change in the Control group (p = 0.01). Opioid usage, although not significantly different, trended towards a greater reduction in the treatment group than in the control group. The incidence of adverse events did not differ significantly between the treatment and control groups.Conclusion: The primary outcomes of the study were met, and the majority of Treatment patients experienced a substantial improvement in PAP (regardless of meeting the study definition of a responder). The significant in PAP was associated with significantly improved QOL metrics, and a trend towards reduced opioid utilization compared to Control. These data indicate that Altius treatment represents a significant therapeutic advancement for lower-limb amputees suffering from chronic PAP.Keywords: post-amputation pain, phantom limb pain, neuromodulation, peripheral nerve stimulation, high-frequency nerve block