Morphologic evaluation of maxillary premolar canals in a subpopulation from southern Brazil: a cone beam computed tomography study

AIM. To evaluate the anatomic variations of both maxillary premolars by cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) images.
MATERIALS AND METHODS. Data were evaluated from 599 exams (313 women and 286 men), scanned by 300 Maxio CT, Instrumentarium®/Kavo Dental Excellence, FOV 5x5 and voxel 0.085 mm. The images were evaluated by two endodontists using Vertucci’s classification.
RESULTS. The prevalence of maxillary premolars with more than one root was higher in men (48.3%) than in women (29.7%) (p < 0.05). A higher percentage of type I and type III canals (53.1% and 20.2%, respectively) was observed in the second premolar (15.0%) with only one root than in the first premolars (14.3%). The percentage of IV, V, VI, and VII type canals was higher in the first premolars. Most teeth with two roots had a root canal of the type IV, both in the first premolar (97.9%) and in the second premolar (93.5%). When all teeth were considered, regardless of the number of roots, the first maxillary premolar showed a higher prevalence of type IV root canals (68.0%) and the second maxillary premolar showed a higher prevalence of type I root canals (46.4%) (p < 0.05). There was a significant association between gender and the number of maxillary premolar roots in a southern Brazilian subpopulation. Most maxillary first premolars had two roots with a type IV configuration and this configuration was common in males, while second premolars tended to be singlerooted and with a type I configuration and were common in women.

1. Vertucci F.J. Root canal anatomy of the human permanent teeth. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1984;58(5):589–599. https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-4220(84)90085-9

2. Ahmad I.A., Alenezi M.A. Root and root canal morphology of maxillary first premolars: a literature review and clinical considerations. J Endod. 2016;42(6):861–872. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2016.02.017

3. Baratto Filho F., Zaitter S., Haragushiku G.A., de Campos E.A., Abuabara A., Correr G.M. Analysis of the internal anatomy of maxillary first molars by using different methods. J Endod. 2009;35(3):337–342. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2008.11.022

4. Celikten B., Tufenkci P., Aksoy U., Kalender A., Kermeoglu F., Dabaj P., Orhan K. Cone beam CT evaluation of mandibular molar root canal morphology in a Turkish Cypriot population. Clin Oral Investig. 2016;20(8):2221–2226. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-016-1742-2

5. Patel S., Dawood A., Whaites E., Pitt Ford T. New dimensions in endodontic imaging: part 1. Conventional and alternative radiographic systems. Int Endod J. 2009;42(6):447–462. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2008.01530.x

6. Koivisto T., Chiona D., Milroy L.L., McClanahan S.B., Ahmad M., Bowles W.R. Mandibular canal location: Cone-beam computed tomography examination. J Endod. 2016;42(7):1018–1021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2016.03.004

7. Martins J.N.R., Gu Y., Marques D., Francisco H., Caramês J. Differences on the root and root canal morphologies between Asian and white ethnic groups analyzed by cone-beam computed tomography. J Endod. 2018;44(7):1096–1104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2018.04.001

8. Awawdeh L., Abdullah H., Al-Qudah A. Root form and canal morphology of Jordanian maxillary first premolars. J Endod. 2008;34(8):956–961. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2008.04.013

9. Silva E.J., Nejaim Y., Silva A.I., Haiter-Neto F., Zaia A.A., Cohenca N. Evaluation of root canal configuration of maxillary molars in a Brazilian population using conebeam computed tomographic imaging: an in vivo study. J Endod. 2014;40(2):173–176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2013.10.002

10. Wayman B.E., Patten J.A., Dazey S.E. Relative frequency of teeth needing endodontic treatment in 3350 consecutive endodontic patients. J Endod. 1994;20(8):399–401. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0099-2399(06)80299-2

11. Zaatar E.I., al-Kandari A.M., Alhomaidah S., al-Yasin I.M. Frequency of endodontic treatment in Kuwait: radiographic evaluation of 846 endodontically treated teeth. J Endod. 1997;23(7):453–456. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0099-2399(97)80302-0

12. Ok E., Altunsoy M., Nur B.G., Aglarci O.S., 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. https://doi.org/10.3109/00016357.2014.898091

13. Abella F., Teixidó L.M., Patel S., Sosa F., Duran-Sindreu F., Roig M. Cone-beam computed tomography analysis of the root canal morphology of maxillary first and second premolars in a Spanish population. J Endod. 2015;41(8):1241–1247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2015.03.026

14. Estrela C., Bueno M.R., Couto G.S., Rabelo L.E., Alencar A.H., Silva R.G. et al. Study of root canal anatomy in human permanent teeth in a subpopulation of Brazil’s center region using cone-beam computed tomography – Part 1. Braz Dent J. 2015;26(5):530–536. https://doi.org/10.1590/0103-6440201302448

15. de Lima C.O., de Souza L.C., Devito K.L., do Prado M., Campos C.N. Evaluation of root canal morphology of maxillary premolars: a cone-beam computed tomography study. Aust Endod J. 2019;45(2):196–201. https://doi.org/10.1111/aej.12308

16. Pécora J.D., Saquy P.C., Sousa Neto M.D., Woelfel J.B. Root form and canal anatomy of maxillary first premolars. Braz Dent J. 1992;2(2):87–94.

17. Estrela C., Holland R., Estrela C.R., Alencar A.H., SousaNeto M.D., Pécora J.D. Characterization of successful root canal treatment. Braz Dent J. 2014;25(1):3–11. https://doi.org/10.1590/0103-6440201302356

18. Neelakantan P., Subbarao C., Ahuja R., Subbarao C.V., Gutmann J.L. 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):1622–1627. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2010.07.006

19. Silva D., Gomes A.C., Silva J.M. da, Neves A. de A., Zaia A.A., Silva E.J.N.L. da. Evaluation of foraminal transportation during foraminal enlargement with different instrumentation systems. Braz J Oral Sci. 2014;13(4):246–250. https://doi.org/10.1590/1677-3225v13n4a01