An Audit of the Technical Quality and Iatrogenic Errors of Root Canal Treatment by Undergraduate Dental Students at the University of Sharjah

Endodontic Procedural Errors and Associated Factors among Undergraduate Dental Students: A Cross-sectional Study

AIMS AND BACKGROUND

To assess the procedural errors committed by undergraduate students at RAK College of Dental Sciences, during root canal treatments and the factors associated with these errors.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this cross-sectional study, 180 self-administered questionnaires were distributed, each comprising 26 questions, among 4th and 5th-year students. Participants were requested to report their endodontic mishaps based on feedback from their supervisors. The questionnaire assessed the frequency and types of procedural errors, considering patient, operator, and tooth-related factors. Data were collected tabulated and analyzed using the Chi-square test.

RESULTS

A total of 124 root canal-treated teeth exhibiting iatrogenic errors done by students were assessed. Out of which, 53% were performed by 5th-year students, and 69% were conducted by female operators. About 62% of errors occurred in the upper teeth and 68% in the posterior teeth. The most prevalent errors during the rubber dam isolation step were soft tissue trauma (21%) and isolation leakage (20%), significantly associated with limited mouth opening, excessive salivation, and tooth malalignment (p < 0.05). Apical blockage (15%) emerged as the most frequent error during instrumentation phase, showing a significant association with canal dimension and curvature (p < 0.05). For access cavity and obturation phases, under-extended cavity (9%), and under-extended filling (11%) were the most reported errors, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Tooth isolation emerges as a particularly challenging aspect for dental students, particularly when dealing with patients exhibiting limited mouth opening and excessive salivation.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Clinical instructors should caution the undergraduates about the heightened risk of endodontic procedural errors when dealing with patients exhibiting limited mouth opening, excessive salivation, tooth misalignment, and narrow canals. Addressing these challenges is crucial for enhancing the proficiency of undergraduate students in performing successful root canal treatments. How to cite this article: Elsayed MA, Islam MS, Saleh DR, et al. Endodontic Procedural Errors and Associated Factors among Undergraduate Dental Students: A Cross-sectional Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2023;24(12):998-1007.

Comparison of Endodontic Failures between Nonsurgical Retreatment and Endodontic Surgery: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis with Trial Sequential Analysis

Background and Objectives: In the presence of a persistent endodontic lesion or endodontic failure, the alternative for the recovery of the dental element is endodontic retreatment or endodontic surgery, which consists in the surgical removal of the root apices with retrograde closure of the endodontium. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to provide an updated value of the Risk Ratio between the two types of treatment in order to offer to clinicians who propose a non-surgical endodontic retreatment or an endodontic surgery a direct comparison. Materials and Methods: The revision was performed according to PRISMA indications: three databases (PubMed, Scopus and Cochrane register) were consulted through the use of keywords relevant to the revision topic: surgical endodontic retreatment, endodontic retreatment, apicoectomy. This search produced 7568 records which, after eliminating duplicates and applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria, resulted in a total of seven included articles. The meta-analyses were conducted by applying fixed-effects models, given the low percentage of heterogeneity. In addition, trial sequency analysis (TSA) was performed for the analysis of the statistical power of the results and GRADE for the quality of the evidence. Results: The results of the meta-analyses’ data report an aggregate risk ratio (RR) between non-surgical endodontic retreatment and surgical endodontic retreatment of: 1.05 [0.74, 1.47] at one year of follow-up; RR 2.22 [1.45, 3.41] at two years of follow-up; an RR 1.08 [0.73 1.62] for a follow-up period of 3–4 years; and an RR 0.92 [0.53, 1.61] for a follow-up period of 8–10 years. Conclusions: The results of the present meta-analysis show that in the long term, the risk of failure is identical for the two groups, and there is only a slightly higher risk of failure for non-surgical endodontic retreatments, when only two years of follow-up are considered.