Journal of Isfahan Dental School

Investigation of Morphological Variations of Canal and Root of First Mandibular Molar in Tomographic Images Computer with Cone Beam in Patients of Arak City

Document Type : مقاله‌های پژوهشی

Author

Dentistry Student, Arak University of Medical Sciences, Arak, Iran

Abstract

Introduction: As the first teeth to erupt, first molars have the most complex root system and canal morphology and are among the most susceptible teeth to decay and destruction.
Materials and methods: In this descriptive cross-sectional study, the morphological variation of the mandibular first molar canal and root was investigated in 170 CBCT radiology image samples. In this study, the age and gender of the individual, the number of roots and canals of the mandibular first molar, the morphology of the canal in each root, the presence of the midmesial canal and the presence of the distolingual root were also investigated. In the end, frequency and percentage indicators were used to analyze data and chi-square test was used to compare frequencies.
Findings: The average age of the subjects studied was 39.2 years. The subjects included 86 women and 84 men. The most seen sample was a molar tooth with two roots and three canals. In terms of canal morphology in the mesial root, the most common canal morphology was type 4 and then type 2. In terms of canal morphology in the distal root, the most common canal morphology was type 1. In the studied samples, midmesial canal was not found in 99.4% of cases and distolingual root was not found in 94.7% of cases.
Conclusion: Two-rooted and three-channel molar without midmesial canal and without distolingual root was the most common case found in this study. The most common canal morphology in the mesial root was type 4 and the most common canal morphology in the distal root was type 1.
Key words: Molar, root canal, computed tomography images, morphology

1. Maggiore C, Gallottini L, Resi JP. Mandibular first and second molar. The variability of roots and root canal system. Minerva Stomatol 1998; 47(9): 409-16.
2. Fan B, Cheung GS, Fan M, Gutmann JL, Bian Z. C-shaped canal system in mandibular second molars: Part I--Anatomical features. J Endod 2004; 30(12): 899-903.
3. Neelakantan P, Subbarao C, Subbarao CV, Ravindranath M. Root and canal morphology of mandibular second molars in an Indian population. J Endod 2010; 36(8): 1319-22.
4. Navarro LF, Luzi A, Garcia AA, Garcia AH. Third canal in the mesial root of permanent mandibular first molars: review of the literature and presentation of 3 clinical reports and 2 in vitro studies. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Buca 2007; 12(8): E605-9.
5. Weine FS. Endodontic therapy. 5th ed. St. Louis, Missour: Mosby; 1996. p. 242-3.
6. Vertucci FJ. Root canal anatomy of the human permanent teeth. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1984; 58(5): 589-99.
7. Gulabivala K, Opasanon A, Ng YL, Alavi A. Root and canal morphology of Thai mandibular molars. Int Endod J 2002; 35(1): 56-62.
8. Nallapati S. Three canal mandibular first and second premolars: a treatment approach. A case report. J Endod 2005; 31(6): 474-6.
9. Nallapati S. Aberrant root canal anatomy: a review. Caribbean Institute of Endodontics 2007; 4: 50-62.
10. Ilgüy D, Ilgüy M, Fisekçioglu E, Ersan N, Tanalp J, Dölekoglu S. Assessment of root canal treatment outcomes performed by Turkish dental students: results after two years. J Dent Educ 2013; 77(4): 502-9.
11. Dalessandri D, Laffranchi L, Tonni I, Zotti F, Piancino MG, Paganelli C, et al. Advantages of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) in the orthodontic treatment planning of cleidocranial dysplasia patients: a case report. Head Face Med 2011; 7: 6.
12. Alamri HM, Sadrameli M, Alshalhoob MA, Sadrameli M, Alshehri MA. Applications of CBCT in dental practice: a review of the literature. Gen Dent 2012; 60(5): 390-400; quiz 1-2.
13. Venkatesh E, Elluru SV. Cone beam computed tomography: basics and applications in dentistry. J Istanb Univ Fac Dent 2017; 51(3 Suppl 1): S102-21.
14. Ingle JI, Bakland LK, Baumgartner JC. Ingle's endodontics. 6th ed. Hamilton, Ont: BC Decker; 2008.
15. Howe RB. First molar radicular bone near the maxillary sinus: a comparison of CBCT analysis and gross anatomic dissection for small bony measurement. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2009; 108(2): 264-9.
16. 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.
17. Tofangchiha M, Bolbolian M, Ghasemi A. Evaluation of root canal morphology of maxillary first premolars using cone beam computed tomography [in Persian]. J Mashhad Dent Sch 2018; 42(1): 40-31.
18. Hossini S. Evaluation of mandibular and maxillary first molars anatomy by using CBCT archive in Ardabil population in 2015-2019 [in Persian]. [Thesis]. Ardabil, Iran: Ardabil University of Medical Sciences; 2018.
19. Badian N. Evaluation of morphological variation of root and canal of first mandibular molar by cone-beam computed tomography in patients referred to Shahid Beheshti Dental School in 2016 [in Persian]. [Thesis]. Tehran, Iran: Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences; 2016.
Journal of Isfahan Dental School
Volume 18, Issue 4 - Serial Number 4
December 2021
Pages 416-422