Changes of Periodontal Parameters after Apical Surgery: Correlation of Clinical and Cone-beam Computed Tomographic Data

Factors that influence the outcomes of surgical endodontic treatment

Surgical endodontic treatment encompasses a broad spectrum of procedures, amongst which root-end cavity preparation and filling, retrograde root canal treatment and through-and-through endodontic surgery, may be classified under the umbrella term 'Root-end surgery'. This narrative review considers the available data on periapical healing, soft tissue healing, tooth survival and oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL), following root-end surgery and the factors that affect its outcomes. The pooled periapical healed rate for the studies published up to 2021 was 69% (95% CI: 65%, 73%) but increased to 76% (95% CI: 66%, 86%) when only data from the 2020's studies were analysed. The prognostic factors consistently reported for periapical healing have included: pre-operative periapical lesion with complete loss of buccal plate, quality of root-end preparation, remaining thickness of apical root dentine and restorative status. Soft tissue healing of the reflected flap was found to have a positive association with periapical healing. The survival rates following root-end surgery range from 48% to 93%, with failure of periapical healing associated with root and crown fracture, being the predominant reasons for tooth extraction. The factors influencing impact of root-end surgery on patients' quality of life could not be adequately evaluated due to design flaws in the available studies. In conclusion, if root canal treatment failure due to leakage through cracks, fractures or restoration margin are excluded, the remaining cases may represent localized residual infection and inflammation at the periapex that should be amenable to predictable management with the aid of modern root-end surgery.

Influence of incision on periodontal parameters after apical surgery: a meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

The aim of the present meta-analysis was to determine the effect of the different incision designs used in apical surgery on periodontal parameters.

METHODS

An electronic search in Cochrane Library, Pubmed (MEDLINE), and Scopus was conducted on April 2020. Two independent investigators included clinical trials and prospective cohort studies comparing the influence of different incision designs used in apical surgery on gingival recession, periodontal probing depth, and clinical attachment level. A pairwise and network meta-analysis was performed in order to meta-analyze the direct and the indirect comparisons among the incision designs.

RESULTS

Six articles were included for the qualitative and the quantitative syntheses, involving a total of 401 teeth (372 patients). The pairwise meta-analysis did not reveal statistically significant differences between the incision designs in any of the outcomes evaluated. However, to reduce the amount of buccal gingival recession, the papilla base incision presented the highest probabilities of being ranked the most effective incision (85.7%), followed by submarginal incision (50.0%) and intrasulcular incision (14.3%).

CONCLUSION

Regardless of the incision design used, the periodontal parameters did not statistically differ after apical surgery.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Periodontal parameters did not significantly change despite the incision used in apical surgery. However, based on the results of the present review, the papilla base incision seems to be the best option to reduce the amount of buccal gingival recession.

Comparison of 3D X-ray tomography with computed tomography in patients with distal extremity fractures

OBJECTIVE

To compare fracture detection, image quality, and radiation dose in patients with distal extremity fractures using 3D tomography and computed tomography (CT).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

IRB approval was obtained including informed consent for this prospective study from June to December 2016. Patients diagnosed with an acute fracture at CT were consecutively scanned on the same day using 3D tomography. Anatomical location (effected bone and location within the bone) and morphological characteristics of fractures (avulsion, articular involvement, mono- vs. multifragmented, displacement), visibility of bone/soft tissue structures, and image quality were assessed independently by two blinded readers on a 5-point Likert scale. Dose-length-product (DLP; mGy*cm) was compared between both modalities. Descriptive statistics, Wilcoxon signed rank test (P < 0.05), Student's t test (P < 0.05), and Cohen's kappa (κ) for interreader reliability were calculated.

RESULTS

In 46 patients (28 males; 18 females; mean age, 53 ± 20 years) with 28 hand/wrist and 18 foot/ankle examinations, 86 out of 92 fractures were diagnosed with 3D tomography compared with CT. No false-positive finding occurred at 3D tomography. The six missed fractures on 3D tomography were five avulsion fractures of the carpals/metacarpals or tarsals/metatarsals, respectively, and one nondisplaced fracture of the capitate. Interreader agreement of anatomical location and morphological characteristics was substantial to almost perfect for upper (κ = 0.80-0.96) and lower (κ = 0.70-0.97) extremity fractures. Visibility of bone and soft tissue structures and image quality were slightly inferior using 3D tomography compared with CT (upper extremity P < 0.001-0.038 and lower extremity P < 0.001-0.035). DLP of a comparable scan coverage was significantly lower for 3D tomography (P < 0.001) for both upper (3D mean, 19.4 ± 5.9 mGy*cm; estimated CT mean, 336.5 ± 52.2 mGy*cm) and lower extremities (3D mean, 24.1 ± 11.1 mGy*cm; estimated CT mean, 182.9 ± 6.5 mGy*cm). Even the highest DLP with 3D tomography was < 30% of the mean estimated CT dose of a comparable area of coverage.

CONCLUSION

Fracture assessment of peripheral extremities is reliable utilizing a low-dose 3D tomography X-ray system, with slightly reduced image quality.