Worldwide Prevalence of Single-rooted with a Single Root Canal and Four-rooted Configurations in Maxillary Molars: A Multi-center Cross-sectional Study with Meta-analysis.

To evaluate the prevalence of single root with a single root canal and four-root configurations in the maxillary first and second molars, and analyze how geographic region, ethnicity, sex, and age impact these outcomes. Researchers from 44 nations examined 26,400 maxillary molars using cone-beam computed tomography scans to gather data on the proportions of single roots with single canals and four-root configurations. All observers underwent prior calibration regarding the step-by-step assessment protocol and anatomical concepts to ensure consistent evaluations across all assessed locations. Tests were conducted to evaluate the intraobserver and interobserver reliability. Demographic data including ethnicity, gender, and age were collected for each participant. The potential impact of imaging voxel size and field-of-view on bias was also assessed. The primary results were depicted as odds ratios and untransformed proportion forest plots with 95% confidence intervals. Additionally, a meta-analysis was performed to compare various subgroups and identify sources of variation among them. Statistical significance was set at 5%. The prevalence of single-rooted with a single canal and four-rooted configurations in the maxillary first molar was 0.16% and 0.28%, respectively, while in the maxillary second molar, it was 2.56% and 0.83%. Males tended to exhibit lower percentages of single roots with a single canal (P <.05) and higher percentages of four-rooted configurations (P >.05) in the second molar, whereas the African subgroup displayed lower proportions for both configurations. Additionally, in both teeth, single roots with a single canal were more prevalent among older patients. Voxel size and field-of-view did not significantly influence the results (P >.05). The proportions of single-rooted with a single canal and four-rooted configurations were low, and demographic factors such as geographic region, ethnicity, sex, and age may have influenced the outcomes for the maxillary second molar. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]