Dental and Medical Problems

Dent Med Probl
Index Copernicus (ICV 2020) – 128.41
MEiN – 70 pts
CiteScore (2021) – 2.0
JCI (2021) – 0.5
Average rejection rate (2021) – 82%
ISSN 1644-387X (print)
ISSN 2300-9020 (online)
Periodicity – quarterly

Download original text (EN)

Dental and Medical Problems

2022, vol. 59, nr 2, April-June, p. 209–216

doi: 10.17219/dmp/143546

Publication type: original article

Language: English

License: Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported (CC BY 3.0)

Download citation:

  • BIBTEX (JabRef, Mendeley)
  • RIS (Papers, Reference Manager, RefWorks, Zotero)

Cite as:


Reda R, Zanza A, Bhandi S, De Biase A, Testarelli L, Miccoli G. Surgical-anatomical evaluation of mandibular premolars by CBCT among the Italian population. Dent Med Probl. 2022;59(2):209–216. doi:10.17219/dmp/143546

Surgical-anatomical evaluation of mandibular premolars by CBCT among the Italian population

Rodolfo Reda1,A,D, Alessio Zanza1,C, Shilpa Bhandi2,B, Alberto De Biase1,E, Luca Testarelli1,F, Gabriele Miccoli1,C

1 Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Sciences, the Sapienza University of Rome, Italy

2 Department of Restorative Dental Sciences, College of Dentistry, Jazan University, Saudi Arabia

Abstract

Background. The thorough knowledge of the anatomy of mandibular premolars is an essential factor for a correct approach to endodontic treatment, concerning both non-surgical and surgical treatment.

Objectives. Since there is no data on the Italian population in this context, the aim of this study was to evaluate, from a surgical perspective, the anatomy of mandibular premolars among the Italian population through a cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) analysis, considering the morphology of their root canals according to Vertucci’s classification and the prospect of their apices with regard to the vestibular bone plate and the proximity to the inferior alveolar nerve and the mental foramen as well as to evaluate the most appropriate distance from the apex in the radicular resection (3 mm or 5 mm).

Material and methods. At total of 492 CBCT acquisitions (from 246 males and 246 females) were included retrospectively, evaluating 720 mandibular premolars. Age, gender, the tooth position in relation to the vestibular plate, the number of roots, the tooth length and the root length, the number of canals, the configuration of the root canal system according to Vertucci’s criteria, C-shaped canals, the distance from the cementoenamel junction (CEJ) to the canal bifurcation, the number of apical foramina, and the distance from the apex to the inferior alveolar nerve or the mental foramen were evaluated.

Results. The study highlighted the frequent anatomic variability of the root canal system. It found the presence of 1 root for first and second premolars in 97% and 99% of cases, of 2 roots in 2.7% and 0.7% of cases, and of 3 roots in 0.3% and 0.3% cases, respectively. In 92% of cases, the mental foramen was located below a second premolar, or between a first premolar and a second premolar; only in 8% of cases, it was located close to a first premolar, but never as close as to a second premolar.

Conclusions. Mandibular premolars show a truly surprising anatomical variability, especially for mandibular first premolars, which therefore requires adequate radiographic planning before providing any endodontic treatment, or especially endodontic retreatment or endodontic surgery. Taking into account proximity to the inferior alveolar nerve and the mental foramen, any surgical approach must be carefully planned. Frequently, a two-dimensional (2D) radiographic examination is not sufficient to fully understand the anatomical variability of these teeth.

Keywords: endodontics, CBCT, mandibular premolars, endodontic surgery, inferior alveolar nerve

Introduction

The complete understanding of the anatomy of mandibular premolars represents a major challenge for the endodontic practitioner, since the correct interpretation of the root canal system in terms of canal morphology and number of canals is fundamental for the successful outcome of endodontic therapies.1 Too frequently mandibular premolars, but especially mandibular first premolars, are thought to have a single root with a single canal. This belief leads to accessing cavities in an extremely conservative way, which does not help in locating any other possible canal orifice, with a rate of around 10% of premolar teeth where one or more canals have not be instrumented and a prevalence of consequent apical periodontitis of around 50%.2, 3 The problem is even greater considering that these teeth often have anatomy that is difficult to interpret, especially in their middle and apical thirds, which makes the outcome of endodontic treatment even more uncertain due to the lack of instrumentation and/or irrigation.4, 5

Technological development has led to the improvement of the sensitivity of radiographic diagnostic examinations and considerably increased the understanding of the endo­dontic root canal system. Hence, in the last years, the international research has focused on how frequently the endodontic anatomy, in particular of some teeth, is under­estimated and not recognized.6, 7, 8, 9, 10

The risk of performing endodontic treatment without having understood the dental anatomy represents a condition of extreme danger of overloading the rotating endodontic instruments with torsional stress and cyclic fatigue, which may lead to their intracanal separation.1, 11 Thus, the knowledge of the root canal anatomy is an essential factor for the choice of rotary instruments to be used during an endodontic therapy.12, 13

As compared to other teeth, premolars show high hetero­geneity in terms of anatomical features, which is related to several factors, including age, sex and ethnicity.2, 4

Although intraoral radiographs are considered as the imaging modality of choice in the evaluation of the endo­dontic patient, performing cone-beam computed tomo­graphy (CBCT) is absolutely recommended when the diagnosis cannot be confidently determined in order to exclude any type of risk during the orthograde root canal therapy. Instead, as provided in the position statement of the American Association of Endodontists (AAE) and the American Academy of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology (AAOMR), limited field-of-view (FOV) CBCT should be considered as the imaging modality of choice for pre-surgical treatment planning in order to localize root apices and to evaluate their proximity to the adjacent anatomical structures.14 The proximity of the apices of mandibular premolars to the inferior alveolar nerve represents a very important risk factor with regard to the root canal therapy in its instrumentation, irrigation, and especially obturation phases, as there might occur transient or permanent lesions to the inferior alveolar nerve.15, 16, 17 The foregoing is even more valid when surgical endodontic treatment has to be performed to resect the terminal part of the root of a mandibular premolar, recommended at 3 mm from the apex.18 From this point of view, it also becomes necessary to analyze the perspective of root apices with regard to the vestibular bone plate in order to carefully plan a surgical approach, considering their proximity to the inferior alveolar nerve or the mental foramen and its anterior loop.14, 18

Therefore, since there is no data regarding the Italian population in this context, the objective of this study was to analyze the anatomy of mandibular premolars with Vertucci’s classification4 using CBCT, to evaluate the prospect of their apices with regard to the vestibular bone plate and the proximity to the inferior alveolar nerve and the mental foramen, and to evaluate the most appropriate distance from the apex in the radicular resection (3 mm or 5 mm) in order to establish the most predictable approach.

Material and methods

The present CBCT study was conducted retrospectively, and all evaluations were conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. Furthermore, the study was approved by the institutional ethics committee at the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Sciences of the Sapienza University of Rome, Italy (protocol No. 528/17). All the analyzed CBCT scans had been previously acquired for reasons other than this research, such as oral surgery planning, the extractions of third lower and upper molars, and the implant placement. The CBCT scans were taken with the Orthophos SL 3D imaging unit (Dentsply Sirona, Wals bei Salzburg, Austria) set at 500 ms, 7 mA, 85 kV, 8 cm × 8 cm FOV, and a resolution of 0.16 mm; the software used for the analysis of the images was Sidexis Galileos Implant, v. 9.1 (Dentsply Sirona).

The inclusion criteria for considering mandibular premolars were as follows:

– the presence of at least 1 mandibular first or second premolar;

– complete root formation;

– no resorption signs;

– no previous endodontic treatment;

– no posts or coronal restorations;

no root canal calcification – root canals had to be visible from the pulp chamber to their apical part;

– not having any condition that could limit the possibility of identifying structures being the object of the study, such as neoplasms, cysts, large peri-radicular lesions, artifacts, or internal or external root resorption;

– age over 18 years; and

– belonging to the Italian population.

The evaluated variables were as follows:

– age;

– gender;

– the tooth position in relation to the vestibular plate (Figure 1);

– the number of roots;

– the tooth length and the root length;

– the number of canals;

– the configuration of the root canal system according to Vertucci’s criteria (Figure 2)

– C-shaped canals;

– the distance from the cementoenamel junction (CEJ) to the canal bifurcation (if present);

– the number of apical foramina; and

– the distance from the apex to the inferior alveolar nerve or the mental foramen (Figure 3).

Based on the selection criteria, 720 mandibular pre­molars were included in the study (380 mandibular first premolars and 340 mandibular second premolars) after 492 CBCT acquisitions (from 246 males and 246 females).

Before proceeding to any surgical evaluation, the endo­dontic anatomy of these mandibular premolars was studied, bearing in mind the classification proposed by Vertucci.

First of all, the number of roots was considered, which is fundamental for evaluating a possible surgical approach. The root canal system was established following the indications provided in the Vertucci’s classification: type I (1-1); type II (2-1); type III (1-2-1); type IV (2-2); type V (1-2); type VI (2-1-2 ); type VII (1-2-1-2); type VIII (3-3), and other possible configurations, such as C-shaped canals.4

In order to simulate the execution of the apical resection at 90°, following the recommendations of the ‘modern technique’ proposed by Kim and Kratchman,19 a cut at 3 mm from the apex was simulated. The decision where to perform the apical resection was complicated by the fact that in many cases, only resection at 5 mm from the apex reveals the root canal anatomy that is more easily manageable in retrograde surgical endodontics.

The following characteristics were studied at the levels of 3 mm and 5 mm:

– the number of root canals present;

– root canal configuration;

– apical foramina (Figure 4);

the distance from the apex to the vestibular plate (at 0 mm, 3 mm and 5 mm from the apex); and

– the distance from the apex to the inferior alveolar nerve or the mental foramen.

All measurements were performed by 2 authors (R.R and A.Z.), calibrated after performing the analysis of the first 50 CBCT scans together.

Statistical analysis

The statistical analysis of the data was performed using the IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows software, v. 22.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, USA).

Descriptive statistics were presented as mean and standard deviation (M ±SD), and frequencies for categorical variables. For continuous, normally distributed variables, differences between the various groups were calculated with Student’s t test. The linear and logistic regression method was used for each study variable (the indepen­dent variable) in relation to any primary outcome (the dependent variable). The level of significance was set at p = 0.05.20

Results

The study found the presence of 1 root for first and second premolars in 97% and 99% of cases, of 2 roots in 2.7% and 0.7% of cases, and of 3 roots in 0.3% and 0.3% cases, respectively. All the registered data was stratified according to gender (male and female) and age (3 age groups of equal size: 18–43 years; 44–69 years; and ≥70 years).

In 92% of cases, the mental foramen was located below a second premolar, or between a first premolar and a second premolar; only in 8% of cases, it was located close to a first premolar, but never as close as to a second premolar.

The root canal anatomy according to Vertucci’s types is presented in Table 1.

After this evaluation, the number of orifices the pre­molars had at their apices was studied; the results are presented in Table 2.

The relationship between the mandibular premolars and the mental foramen has been resumed in Table 3, whilst the perspective of their apices with regard to the vestibular plate is shown in Table 4.

The evaluation of possible endodontic anatomy that could be found in apical resection at 3 mm or 5 mm was carried out. The results for the apical resection at 3 mm are summarized in Table 5, while those for the apical resection at 5 mm in Table 6.

When major root resection is performed, it is necessary to evaluate the amount of residual bone in order to gua­rantee the stability of the tooth required to withstand the chewing loads and to restore the tooth correctly. Precisely in this regard, and considering the different age groups of the patients included in the study, the length of the tooth was measured, taking into account also the partial length of its components, as well as the amount of the residual supporting bone. The results of dental measurements are summarized in Table 7; bone dimensions according to age are presented in Table 8.

Discussion

According to the results of the present study, it can be clearly stated that mandibular premolars are characterized by extremely variable anatomy. As previously pointed out by other authors, this anatomic heterogeneity should be considered while planning both non-surgical and surgical endodontic treatment.21, 22, 23 Furthermore, the results of this study clearly show the relationships between mandibular premolars and the nearby anatomical structures, underlining the importance of careful preoperative evalua­tion. This variability represents an important risk factor for the success of both orthograde endodontic treatment and any surgical approaches carried out to resolve non-surgical endodontic failure. In cases of inexplicable endo­dontic failure with a doubtable diagnosis, it is absolutely necessary to investigate through three-dimensional (3D) diagnostic imaging possible anatomical variations that may have influenced the outcome of the primary treatment, and consider and plan the subsequent surgical approach.14

The inclusion of patients of exclusively Italian origin does not allow us to affirm the variability between ethnic groups, but still offers the possibility of better assessing, excluding this variable, differences between genders and changes that occur with age. However, a comparison between ethnic groups can be made, considering the data obtained by other researchers (Table 9).

The results of this study are consistent with most of the published research listed in Table 9, with the most common anatomical configuration according to Vertucci’s classification being type I (73.95% for mandibular first premolars and 94.12% for mandibular second pre­molars), followed by type IV (16.05% for mandibular first premolars and 2.65% for mandibular second premolars) (Table 1).

The study of the abovementioned characteristics by means of CBCT with a wide FOV certainly might be related to a greater risk of error as compared to the analysis of the extracted teeth, but in the case of artifacts that made the evaluation difficult, the affected teeth were not included, following the study inclusion criteria.

Considering the number of roots, particular attention must be paid to mandibular first premolars, since in the case of the presence of several roots, the root canal ana­tomy is often extremely complex (Figure 4). Even if extremely rare, however, there could be a possibility of finding three-rooted teeth, especially in their apical portion.

In 92% of cases, the mental foramen was located below a second premolar, or between a first premolar and second premolar; only in 8% of cases, it was located close to a first premolar, but never as close as to a second premolar. From this point of view, considering the extreme proximity of a second premolar to the inferior alveolar nerve or the mental foramen (Figure 3), not only is an endodontic surgical approach more difficult, but also in the orthograde root canal therapy, despite the fact that the anatomy of a second premolar is much simpler than in the case of a first premolar, a lot of attention must be paid to avoid over-instrumentation, the extrusions of irrigants or the overfilling of the canal.

Taking into account the close proximity of the apices of premolars, in particular of mandibular second premolars, to the inferior alveolar nerve and the mental foramen, while planning a surgical endodontic operation, it is necessary to consider the possibility of using computer-aided navigation (static and dynamic) that allows minimally invasive interventions, at the same time preserving vital structures.24, 25, 26 Furthermore, proceeding with a piezoelectric system reduces the possibility of transient or permanent damage to the alveolar nerve, and this procedure is recommended.27

On the other hand, having regard to the reduced distance between these teeth and the buccal plate, it is possible to perform an endodontic surgical procedure in a fairly easy way. Great attention must be paid to the design of the flap and to the isolation of the mental nerve from where it passes through the soft tissues. Furthermore, an osteotomic approach with static guidance or dynamic navigation, in association with a piezoelectric system, considerably reduces the risk of any nerve injury.

In the present study, the occurrence of C-shaped canals was not significant in the population, similarly to Vertucci’s type VIII configuration (Table 1).

Conclusions

Despite the limitations of this study, mandibular premolars show a truly surprising anatomical variability, which therefore requires adequate radiographic planning before providing any endodontic treatment, or especially endodontic retreatment or endodontic surgery. Moreover, taking into account proximity to the inferior alveolar nerve and the mental foramen, any surgical approach must be carefully planned. Frequently, a two-dimensional (2D) radiographic examination is not sufficient to fully understand the anatomical variability of these teeth.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

This study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. The study was approved by the institutional ethics committee at the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Sciences of the Sapienza University of Rome, Italy (protocol No. 528/17).

Data availability

All data generated and/or analyzed during this study is included in this published article.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Tables


Table 1. Root canal configuration

Vertucci’s type

First premolars
n = 380

Second premolars
n = 340

I

281 (73.95)

320 (94.12)

II

15 (3.95)

4 (1.18)

III

4 (1.05)

2 (0.59)

IV

61 (16.05)

9 (2.65)

V

15 (3.95)

4 (1.18)

VI

0 (0.00)

0 (0.00)

VII

0 (0.00)

0 (0.00)

VIII

2 (0.53)

0 (0.00)

Other

2 (0.53)

1 (0.29)

Data presented as number (percentage) (n (%)).
Table 2. Number of apical foramena

No. of apical foramena

First premolars
n = 380

Second premolars
n = 340

1

300 (78.95)

325 (95.59)

2

76 (20.00)

14 (4.12)

>2

4 (1.05)

1 (0.29)

Data presented n (%).
Table 3. Distance between the radiographic apex and the mental foramen [mm]

Measurement point

First premolars
n= 380

Second premolars
n = 340

A-C

M-D

A-C

M-D

0 mm

3.40 ±1.80

4.12 ±1.94

3.44 ±1.60

1.20 ±1.12

3 mm

4.12 ±1.84

4.32 ±2.12

4.15 ±2.25

1.25 ±1.02

5 mm

5.87 ±2.81

4.47 ±2.18

5.12 ±1.98

1.34 ±1.12

Data presented as mean ± standard deviation (M ±SD). A-C – apicocoronal; M-D – mesiodistal.
Table 4. Distance between the radiographic apex and the vestibular plate [mm]

Measurement point

First premolars
n = 380

Second premolars
n = 340

0 mm

3.84 ±1.60

4.02 ±1.02

3 mm

3.45 ±1.40

3.75 ±1.24

5 mm

3.12 ±1.24

3.66 ±1.26

Data presented as M ±SD.
Table 5. Number of root canals in the simulation of resection at 3 mm

No. of canals

First premolars
n = 380

Second premolars
n = 340

1

300 (78.95)

325 (95.59)

2

76 (20.00)

14 (4.12)

>2

4 (1.05)

1 (0.29)

Data presented n (%).
Table 6. Number of root canals in the simulation of resection at 5 mm

No. of canals

First premolars
n = 380

Second premolars
n = 340

1

315 (82.89)

325 (95.59)

2

61 (16.05)

10 (2.94)

>2

4 (1.05)

5 (1.47)

Data presented n (%).
Table 7. Tooth measurements [mm]

Teeth

Distance from the occlusal plane to CEJ

Distance from CEJ to the apex

Distance from CEJ to the canal bifurcation

Tooth length

First premolars
n = 380

6.5 ±1.1

15.0 ±2.4

3.0 ±1.1

21.0 ±1.2

Second premolars
n = 340

6.7 ±1.4

16.2 ±2.2

2.4 ±1.9

21.8 ±1.9

Data presented as M ±SD. CEJ – cementoenamel junction.
Table 8. Bone level measurements (from the apex to the crestal bone) [mm]

Teeth

Age groups

18–43 years

44–69 years

≥70 years

First premolars
n = 380

15.1 ±2.2

13.1 ±1.2

11.4 ±1.1

Second premolars
n = 340

16.3 ±2.1

14.8 ±2.1

12.1 ±1.8

Data presented as M ±SD.
Table 9. Overview of the incidences of some documented ethnic and population variations in the anatomy of mandibular first and second premolars

Study

Population

Sample size

Tooth

Root canal configuration according to Vertucci’s types

I
[%]

II
[%]

III
[%]

IV
[%]

V
[%]

VI
[%]

VII
[%]

VIII
[%]

other
[%]

Vertucci21
1978

not specified

400

mandibular first premolar

70.0

4.0

1.5

24.0

0.5

0

0

0

0

400

mandibular second premolar

97.5

0

0

2.5

0

0

0

0

0

Yang et al.28

2013

Chinese subpopulation

440

mandibular first premolar

76.14

3.41

2.73

6.59

9.32

0

0

0.68

1.14

Wu et al.29
2020

Chinese subpopulation

1,296

mandibular first premolar

81.0

0

3.0

0

12.1

0

0

0.5

3.0

Ok et al.30
2014

Turkish population

1,471

mandibular first premolar

92.8

0.3

1.0

3.4

4.4

0

0

1.0

1,345

mandibular second premolar

98.5

0.1

0.1

0.9

0.5

0

0

0.2

Alfawaz et al.31

2019

Saudi population

391

mandibular first premolar

88.0

3.6

3.1

2.0

1.5

0.3

0

1.5

343

mandibular second premolar

90.1

4.4

0.3

2.6

0.9

0

0

1.7

Bulut et al.32

2015

Turkish population

585

mandibular first premolar

94.20

0.64

1.12

0.80

3.24

0

0

0

549

mandibular second premolar

98.9

0.2

0.4

0

0.5

0

0

0

Awawdeh
and Al-Qudah
33

2008

Jordanian population

500

mandibular first premolar

58.2

4.8

1.4

14.4

16.8

0.8

1.0

0

2.6

400

mandibular second premolar

78.0

3.8

0.1

5.5

12.3

0

0

0

0.5

Baisden et al.34

1992

USA population

500

mandibular first premolar

76

0

0

24

0

0

0

0

0

Sandhya et al.35
2010

Indian population

100

mandibular first premolar

80

9

3

2

4

0

0

0

2

Velmurugan
and Sandhya36
2009

Indian population

100

mandibular first premolar

72

6

3

11

8

0

0

0

0

Iyer et al.37
2006

Chennai population

2,000

mandibular first
and second premolars

75.4

1.0

0

20.8

2.4

0

0

0.4

0

Parekh et al.38
2011

Indian population

40

mandibular first premolar

50.0

5.0

5.0

25.0

12.5

2.5

0

0

0

40

mandibular second premolar

80.0

0

0

2.5

17.5

0

0

0

0

Jain
and Bahuguna39
2011

Gujarati population

138

mandibular first premolar

67.4

8.0

3.7

3.9

16.4

0.7

0

0

0

Sikri and Sikri40
1994

Indian population

112

mandibular first premolar

82

9

3

2

4

0

0

0

0

96

mandibular second premolar

82

9

3

2

4

0

0

0

0

Walker41
1988

Chinese population

100

mandibular first premolar

78

6

6

10

0

0

0

0

0

Liu et al.42
2013

Chinese population

115

mandibular first premolar

65.2

0

2.6

0

21.6

0

0.9

0

0

Khedmat et al.43
2010

Iranian population

217

mandibular first premolar

90.0

1.8

3.2

0.9

4.1

0

0

0

0

Rahimi et al.44
2007

Iranian population

163

mandibular first premolar

70.6

1.9

3.8

3.8

16.9

1.2

0.6

0

1.2

103

mandibular second premolar

76.3

7.9

9.9

5.9

0

0

0

0

0

Sert et al.45
2004

Turkish population

200

mandibular first premolar

60.6

18.5

10.5

7.0

2.5

0

0

1.0

0

200

mandibular second premolar

71.0

7.0

3.5

9.0

7.0

1.5

1.0

0

0

Calişkan et al.46
1995

Turkish population

100

mandibular first premolar

64.15

7.55

3.77

7.55

9.43

1.89

0

5.66

0

100

mandibular second premolar

93.62

0

0

0

6.38

0

0

0

0

Algarni et al.47
2021

Saudi population

216

mandibular first premolar

68.50

11.10

6.01

1.38

12.10

0.92

0

0

0

Dou et al.48
2017

Chinese population

178

mandibular first premolar

62.04

1.12

9.67

0.56

16.91

0

0

1.12

9.36

Figures


Fig. 1. Example of the measurements of the distance from the apex to the vestibular cortical plate at 0 mm, 3 mm and 5 mm from the apex
Fig. 2. Examples of root canal configuration according to Vertucci’s classification
A – type I; B – type III; C – type V; D – C-shaped canal (yellow arrow) in a transversal view.
Fig. 3. Example of the measurement of the distance from the apex to the inferior alveolar nerve or the mental foramen
Fig. 4. Transversal view of a root canal at 3 mm (A) and at the apex (B), showing the number of apical foramina

References (48)

  1. Nascimento EH, Nascimento MC, Gaêta-Araujo H, Fontenele RC, Freitas DQ. Root canal configuration and its relation with endodontic technical errors in premolar teeth: A CBCT analysis. Int Endod J. 2019;52(10):1410–1416. doi:10.1111/iej.13158
  2. Nascimento EH, Gaêta-Araujo H, Andrade MF, Freitas DQ. Prevalence of technical errors and periapical lesions in a sample of endodontically treated teeth: A CBCT analysis. Clin Oral Investig. 2018;22(7):2495–2503. doi:10.1007/s00784-018-2344-y
  3. Karabucak B, Bunes A, Chehoud C, Kohli MR, Setzer F. Prevalence of apical periodontitis in endodontically treated premolars and molars with untreated canal: A cone-beam computed tomography study. J Endod. 2016;42(4):538–541. doi:10.1016/j.joen.2015.12.026
  4. Vertucci FJ. Root canal anatomy of the human permanent teeth. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1984;58(5):589–599. doi:10.1016/0030-4220(84)90085-9
  5. Albuquerque D, Kottoor J, Hammo M. Endodontic and clinical considerations in the management of variable anatomy in mandibular premolars: A literature review. Biomed Res Int. 2014;2014:512574. doi:10.1155/2014/512574
  6. Sousa TO, Haiter-Neto F, Nascimento EH, Peroni LV, Freitas DQ, Hassan B. Diagnostic accuracy of periapical radiography and cone-beam computed tomography in identifying root canal configuration of human premolars. J Endod. 2017;43(7):1176–1179. doi:10.1016/j.joen.2017.02.021
  7. Metska ME, Liem VM, Parsa A, Koolstra JH, Wesselink PR, Ozok AR. Cone-beam computed tomographic scans in comparison with periapical radiographs for root canal length measurement: An in situ study. J Endod. 2014;40(8):1206–1209. doi:10.1016/j.joen.2013.12.036
  8. Zhang D, Chen J, Lan G, et al. The root canal morphology in mandibular first premolars: A comparative evaluation of cone-beam computed tomography and micro-computed tomography. Clin Oral Investig. 2017;21(4):1007–1012. doi:10.1007/s00784-016-1852-x
  9. Nascimento EH, Elias MR, Vasconcelos VH, Haiter-Neto F, Mendonça EF, Sousa TO. Ex vivo detection of apical delta in premolars: A comparative study using periapical radiography, cone-beam computed tomography, and micro-computed tomography. J Endod. 2019;45(5):549–553. doi:10.1016/j.joen.2019.02.022
  10. Reda R, Zanza A, Mazzoni A, Cicconetti A, Testarelli L, Di Nardo D. An update of the possible applications of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in dentistry: A literature review. J Imaging. 2021;7(5):75. doi:10.3390/jimaging7050075
  11. Zanza A, Seracchiani M, Reda R, Di Nardo D, Gambarini G, Testarelli L. Role of the crystallographic phase of NiTi rotary instruments in determining their torsional resistance during different bending conditions. Materials (Basel). 2021;14(21):6324. doi:10.3390/ma14216324
  12. Seracchiani M, Miccoli G, Reda R, et al. A comprehensive in vitro comparison of mechanical properties of two rotary endodontic instruments. World J Dent. 2020;11(3):185–188. doi:10.5005/jp-journals-10015-1729
  13. Zanza A, Seracchiani M, Di Nardo D, Reda R, Gambarini G, Testarelli L. A paradigm shift for torsional stiffness of nickel-titanium rotary instruments: A finite element analysis. J Endod. 2021;47(7):1149–1156. doi:10.1016/j.joen.2021.04.017
  14. Fayad MI, Nair M, Levin MD, et al.; Special Committee to Revise the Joint AAE/AAOMR Position Statement on use of CBCT in endodontics. AAE and AAOMR Joint Position Statement: Use of cone beam computed tomography in endodontics 2015 update. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2015;120(4):508–512. doi:10.1016/j.oooo.2015.07.033
  15. Chong BS, Gohil K, Pawar R, Makdissi J. Anatomical relationship between mental foramen, mandibular teeth and risk of nerve injury with endodontic treatment. Clin Oral Investig. 2017;21(1):381–387. doi:10.1007/s00784-016-1801-8
  16. Ahonen M, Tjäderhane L. Endodontic-related paresthesia: A case report and literature review. J Endod. 2011;37(10):1460–1464. doi:10.1016/j.joen.2011.06.016
  17. Gambarini G, Plotino G, Grande NM, et al. Differential diagnosis of endodontic-related inferior alveolar nerve paraesthesia with cone beam computed tomography: A case report. Int Endod J. 2011;44(2):176–181. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2591.2010.01816.x
  18. Bosykh YY, Turkina AY, Franco RP, Franco A, Makeeva MK. Cone beam computed tomography study on the relation between mental foramen and roots of mandibular teeth, presence of anterior loop and satellite foramina. Morphologie. 2019;103(341 Pt 2):65–71. doi:10.1016/j.morpho.2019.04.002
  19. Kim S, Kratchman S. Modern endodontic surgery concepts and practice: A review. J Endod. 2006;32(7):601–623. doi:10.1016/j.joen.2005.12.010
  20. Corbella S, Baruffaldi M, Perondi I, Taschieri S. Surgically-oriented anatomical study of mandibular premolars: A CBCT study. J Clin Exp Dent. 2019;11(10):e877–e882. doi:10.4317/jced.55848
  21. Vertucci FJ. Root canal morphology of mandibular premolars. J Am Dent Assoc. 1978;97(1):47–50. doi:10.14219/jada.archive.1978.0443
  22. Nallapati S. Three canal mandibular first and second premolars: A treatment approach. J Endod. 2005;31(6):474–476. doi:10.1097/01.don.0000157986.69173.a6
  23. Cleghorn BM, Christie WH, Dong CC. The root and root canal morphology of the human mandibular second premolar: A literature review. J Endod. 2007;33(9):1031–1037. doi:10.1016/j.joen.2007.03.020
  24. Gambarini G, Galli M, Stefanelli LV, et al. Endodontic microsurgery using dynamic navigation system: A case report. J Endod. 2019;45(11):1397–1402.e6. doi:10.1016/j.joen.2019.07.010
  25. Kim JE, Shim JS, Shin Y. A new minimally invasive guided endodontic microsurgery by cone beam computed tomography and 3-dimensional printing technology. Restor Dent Endod. 2019;44(3):e29. doi:10.5395/rde.2019.44.e29
  26. Zubizarreta-Macho Á, Castillo-Amature C, Montiel-Company JM, Mena-Álvarez J. Efficacy of computer-aided static navigation technique on the accuracy of endodontic microsurgery. A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Med. 2021;10(2):313. doi:10.3390/jcm10020313
  27. Tortorici S, Difalco P, Caradonna L, Tetè S. Traditional endodontic surgery versus modern technique: A 5-year controlled clinical trial. J Craniofac Surg. 2014;25(3):804–807. doi:10.1097/SCS.0000000000000398
  28. Yang H, Tian C, Li G, Yang L, Han X, Wang Y. A cone-beam computed tomography study of the root canal morphology of mandibular first premolars and the location of root canal orifices and apical foramina in a Chinese subpopulation. J Endod. 2013;39(4):435–438. doi:10.1016/j.joen.2012.11.003
  29. Wu D, Hu DQ, Xin BC, Sun DG, Ge ZP, Su JY. Root canal morphology of maxillary and mandibular first premolars analyzed using cone-beam computed tomography in a Shandong Chinese population. Medicine (Baltimore). 2020;99(20):e20116. doi:10.1097/MD.0000000000020116
  30. Ok E, Altunsoy M, Nur BG, Aglarci OS, Çolak M, Güngör E. A cone-beam computed tomography study of root canal morphology of maxillary and mandibular premolars in a Turkish population. Acta Odontol Scand. 2014;72(8):701–706. doi:10.3109/00016357.2014.898091
  31. Alfawaz H, Alqedairi A, Al-Dahman YH, et al. Evaluation of root canal morphology of mandibular premolars in a Saudi population using cone beam computed tomography: A retrospective study. Saudi Dent J. 2019;31(1):137–142. doi:10.1016/j.sdentj.2018.10.005
  32. Bulut DG, Kose E, Ozcan G, Sekerci AE, Canger EM, Sisman Y. Evaluation of root morphology and root canal configuration of premolars in the Turkish individuals using cone beam computed tomography. Eur J Dent. 2015;9(4):551–557. doi:10.4103/1305-7456.172624
  33. Awawdeh LA, Al-Qudah AA. Root form and canal morphology of mandibular premolars in a Jordanian population. Int Endod J. 2008;41(3):240–248. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2591.2007.01348.x
  34. Baisden MK, Kulild JC, Weller RN. Root canal configuration of the mandibular first premolar. J Endod. 1992;18(10):505–508. doi:10.1016/S0099-2399(06)81352-X
  35. Sandhya R, Velmurugan N, Kandaswamy D. Assessment of root canal morphology of mandibular first premolars in the Indian population using spiral computed tomography: An in vitro study. Indian J Dent Res. 2010;21(2):169–173. doi:10.4103/0970-9290.66626
  36. Velmurugan N, Sandhya R. Root canal morphology of mandibular first premolars in an Indian population: A laboratory study. Int Endod J. 2009;42(1):54–58. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2591.2008.01494.x
  37. Iyer VH, Indira R, Ramachandran S, Srinivasan MR. Anatomical variations of mandibular premolars in Chennai population. Indian J Dent Res. 2006;17(1):7–10. doi:10.4103/0970-9290.29898
  38. Parekh V, Shah N, Joshi H. Root canal morphology and variations of mandibular premolars by clearing technique: An in vitro study. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2011;12(4):318–321. doi:10.5005/jp-journals-10024-1052
  39. Jain A, Bahuguna R. Root canal morphology of mandibular first premolar in a Gujarati population – an in vitro study. Dent Res J (Isfahan). 2011;8(3):118–122. PMID:22013473. PMCID:PMC3177385.
  40. Sikri VK, Sikri P. Mandibular premolars: Aberrations in pulp space morphology. Indian J Dent Res. 1994;5(1):9–14. PMID:9495145.
  41. Walker RT. Root canal anatomy of mandibular first premolars in a southern Chinese population. Endod Dent Traumatol. 1988;4(5):226–228. doi:10.1111/j.1600-9657.1988.tb00326.x
  42. Liu N, Li X, Liu N, et al. A micro-computed tomography study of the root canal morphology of the mandibular first premolar in a population from southwestern China. Clin Oral Investig. 2013;17(3):999–1007. doi:10.1007/s00784-012-0778-1
  43. Khedmat S, Assadian H, Saravani AA. Root canal morphology of the mandibular first premolars in an Iranian population using cross-sections and radiography. J Endod. 2010;36(2):214–217. doi:10.1016/j.joen.2009.10.002
  44. Rahimi S, Shahi S, Yavari HR, Manafi H, Eskandarzadeh N. Root canal configuration of mandibular first and second premolars in an Iranian population. J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects. 2007;1(2):59–64. doi:10.5681/joddd.2007.010
  45. Sert S, Aslanalp V, Tanalp J. Investigation of the root canal configurations of mandibular permanent teeth in the Turkish population. Int Endod J. 2004;37(7):494–499. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2591.2004.00837.x
  46. Calişkan MK, Pehlivan Y, Sepetçioğlu F, Türkün M, Tuncer SS. Root canal morphology of human permanent teeth in a Turkish population. J Endod. 1995;21(4):200–204. doi:10.1016/S0099-2399(06)80566-2
  47. Algarni YA, Almufarrij MJ, Almoshafi IA, Alhayaza HH, Alghamdi N, Baba SM. Morphological variations of mandibular first premolar on cone-beam computed tomography in a Saudi Arabian sub-population. Saudi Dent J. 2021;33(3):150–155. doi:10.1016/j.sdentj.2019.11.013
  48. Dou L, Li D, Xu T, Tang Y, Yang D. Root anatomy and canal morphology of mandibular first premolars in a Chinese population. Sci Rep. 2017;7:750. doi:10.1038/s41598-017-00871-9