Analysis shows significant variations in canal configurations of mandibular incisors, suggesting implications for endodontic outcomes in Turkish population.
Background: The root canal anatomy of mandibular incisors is complex and often unpredictable,posing challenges for endodontic treatment. Insufficient knowledge of canal morphology mayresult in missed root canals and treatment failures. This study aimed to evaluate the prevalence and variation of Vertucci root canal configurations in mandibular incisors within a Turkishpopulation.Methods: A total of 2400 mandibular central and lateral incisors were collected for analysis.Initially, radiovisiography (RVG) images were employed to determine the number of canals. Teethidentified with 2 canals (n=348) were further examined using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) for detailed morphological assessment. A chi-square test was used to evaluate thedistributions of various tooth types. The significance level was set at P < .05.Results: The most frequently observed root canal configuration was Vertucci type I (85.5%), followed by type III (13%), and type II (1%). Types V and VI were rarely encountered. A chi-squaregoodness-of-fit test demonstrated statistically significant differences in the distribution of canaltypes (P < .001). Type III canals were more likely to have an oval shape, complicating the shapingand obturation processes.Conclusion: In the Turkish population, the mandibular incisors predominantly exhibit Vertuccitype I and type III configurations. Cone beam computed tomography has been established asan effective imaging modality for assessing root canal complexity. Clinicians should be aware ofanatomical variations, especially cases with 2 canals that may converge at the apex to ensuresuccessful endodontic outcomes. Further studies with larger sample sizes are recommended tovalidate these findings.Cite this article as: Özçelik İ, Çiftçioğlu E. “Root canal configuration of mandibular incisors in Turkish population: an analysis usingVertucci’s classification with CBCT”. Essent Dent. 2025, 4, 0053, doi: 10.5152/EssentDent.2025.25053.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Özçelik et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: