Cross-sectional study identifies anatomical anomalies in mandibular molars, highlighting C-shaped canal prevalence.
Background: Information about root canal anatomical variations is important for successful root canal treatment. This study assessed the frequency of common anomalies of permanent mandibular first and second molars using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). Methods: In this cross-sectional study, 505 CBCT scans were evaluated by an oral radiologist and an endodontist to determine the presence/absence of the mid-mesial canal, the C-shaped canal configuration and its type, the third root and its type, taurodontism and its percentage, and dilaceration and its degree. To assess intra- and inter-observer agreements, all CBCT scans were evaluated twice at a one-week interval by both observers. The data were analyzed using the kappa coefficient and univariate logistic regression. Results: The kappa values showed acceptable inter-observer (0.780) and intra-observer (0.983) agreements. Of all, 21 teeth (4.17%) had a mid-mesial canal, 20 teeth (3.96%) had a third root, and 38 teeth (7.52%) had a C-shaped canal. The frequency of the third root (P=0.01) and C-shaped canal (P<0.000) in mandibular second molars was significantly higher than that in mandibular first molars (P<0.000). Taurodontism was detected in 6 teeth (1.19%), while root dilaceration was present in 162 teeth (34.23%). Age and gender had no significant association with the presence of a mid-mesial canal, third root, C-shaped canal, or dilaceration (P>0.05). Conclusion: Mandibular first and second molars were not significantly different in the frequency of mid-mesial canal, taurodontism, and dilaceration. Considering the relatively high prevalence of dilaceration and C-shaped canals in the study population, these anatomical variations should be taken into account in root canal treatment.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Heydari et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: