Periapical microsurgical endodontic treatment of the maxillary second premolar: a clinical case
https://doi.org/10.36377/ET-0150
Abstract
The primary objective of endodontic treatment and apical surgery is the prevention or elimination of inflammatory conditions in the periapical tissues. Such inflammation develops as a result of the metabolic activity of diverse colonies of pathogenic and opportunistic microorganisms colonizing the root canal system. Apical microsurgical intervention represents a promising treatment modality for teeth resistant to conventional (orthograde) therapy. The reported success rate of this procedure exceeds 90%, even in the presence of complications. The occurrence of such complications is often associated with insufficient theoretical training of narrowly specialized clinicians, a lack of appropriate instrumentation, and limited access to magnification equipment, such as binocular loupes or a stationary operating microscope. In some cases, repeated endodontic retreatment proves ineffective and leads to the persistence of apical periodontitis despite technically successful conservative therapy. In these situations, the inflammatory focus is localized within the periodontal space at the apex of the affected tooth. Its etiology is attributed to bacteria persisting in anatomically inaccessible areas of the root canal system. The bacterial biofilm in the apical portion of the root canal system exhibits a complex anatomical configuration, which often cannot be completely eliminated using conventional endodontic techniques.
About the Authors
K. A. OrdashievRussian Federation
Khasan A. Ordashiev – Cand. Sci. (Med.), Specialist of the Highest Qualification Category, Head of the Department of Surgical Dentistry and Maxillofacial Surgery
1 Lenin Sq., Makhachkala, Republic of Dagestan, 367000, Russian Federation
Competing Interests:
The authors report no conflict of interest.
S. M. Kurbanova
Russian Federation
Salimat M. Kurbanova – Student
1 Lenin Sq., Makhachkala, Republic of Dagestan, 367000, Russian Federation
Competing Interests:
The authors report no conflict of interest.
P. A. Gamzatova
Russian Federation
Patimat A. Gamzatova – Student
1 Lenin Sq., Makhachkala, Republic of Dagestan, 367000, Russian Federation
Competing Interests:
The authors report no conflict of interest.
A. K. Dalgatova
Russian Federation
Albina K. Dalgatova – Student
1 Lenin Sq., Makhachkala, Republic of Dagestan, 367000, Russian Federation
Competing Interests:
The authors report no conflict of interest.
K. Z. Agaragimov
Russian Federation
Kerim Z. Agaragimov – Student
1 Lenin Sq., Makhachkala, Republic of Dagestan, 367000, Russian Federation
Competing Interests:
The authors report no conflict of interest.
S. M. Kadyrbekova
Russian Federation
Saniyat M. Kadyrbekova – Student
1 Lenin Sq., Makhachkala, Republic of Dagestan, 367000, Russian Federation
Competing Interests:
The authors report no conflict of interest.
D. R. Kazavatov
Russian Federation
Datay R. Kazavatov – Student
1 Lenin Sq., Makhachkala, Republic of Dagestan, 367000, Russian Federation
Competing Interests:
The authors report no conflict of interest.
R. S. Adzhamatov
Russian Federation
Rashid S. Adzhamatov – Student
1 Lenin Sq., Makhachkala, Republic of Dagestan, 367000, Russian Federation
Competing Interests:
The authors report no conflict of interest.
K. M. Kaziev
Russian Federation
Kazi M. Kaziev – Student
1 Lenin Sq., Makhachkala, Republic of Dagestan, 367000, Russian Federation
Competing Interests:
The authors report no conflict of interest.
F. M. Murtazalieva
Russian Federation
Fatima M. Murtazalieva – Student
1 Lenin Sq., Makhachkala, Republic of Dagestan, 367000, Russian Federation
Competing Interests:
The authors report no conflict of interest.
References
1. Yamasaki M., Kumazawa M., Kohsaka T., Nakamura H., Kameyama Y. Pulpal and periapical tissue reactions after experimental pulpal exposure in rats. J Endod. 1994;20(1):13–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0099-2399(06)80020-8
2. Tsarev V.N. (ed.) Microbiology, virology, immunology of the oral cavity. 2 nd ed. Moscow: GEOTAR-Media; 2021. 720 p. (In Russ.)
3. Wu M.K., Dummer P.M., Wesselink P.R. Consequences of and strategies to deal with residual post-treatment root canal infection. Int Endod J. 2006;39(5):343–356. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2006.01092.x
4. Moura M.S., Guedes O.A., De Alencar A.H., Azevedo B.C., Estrela C. Influence of length of root canal obturation on apical periodontitis detected by periapical radiography and cone beam computed tomography. J Endod. 2009;35(6):805–809. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2009.03.013
5. Hirsch V., Kohli M.R., Kim S. Apicoectomy of maxillary anterior teeth through a piezoelectric bony-window osteotomy: two case reports introducing a new technique to preserve cortical bone. Restor Dent Endod. 2016;41(4):310–315. https://doi.org/10.5395/rde.2016.41.4.310
6. Song M., Nam T., Shin S.J., Kim E. Comparison of clinical outcomes of endodontic microsurgery: 1 year versus long-term follow-up. J Endod. 2014;40(4):490–494. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2013.10.034
7. Setzer F.C., Kohli M.R., Shah S.B., Karabucak B., Kim S. Outcome of endodontic surgery: a meta-analysis of the literature – Part 2: Comparison of endodontic microsurgical techniques with and without the use of higher magnification. J Endod. 2012;38(1):1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2011.09.021
8. Kim S., Kratchman S. Modern endodontic surgery concepts and practice: a review. J Endod. 2006;32(7):601–623. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2005.12.010
Review
For citations:
Ordashiev K.A., Kurbanova S.M., Gamzatova P.A., Dalgatova A.K., Agaragimov K.Z., Kadyrbekova S.M., Kazavatov D.R., Adzhamatov R.S., Kaziev K.M., Murtazalieva F.M. Periapical microsurgical endodontic treatment of the maxillary second premolar: a clinical case. Endodontics Today. 2025;23(4):692-696. https://doi.org/10.36377/ET-0150
























