• H Aydin.
• Private Practice, Antalya, Turkey.
• Niger J Clin Pract. 2021 Mar 1; 24 (3): 435442435-442.

AimsTo investigate the root canal anatomy and the incidence of fused roots in maxillary first molar (MFM) and maxillary second molar (MSM) teeth in the Turkish population and compare them to teeth with separate roots using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT).MethodsCBCT images of 616 MFMs and 703 MSMs were analyzed from 402 patients for the number of roots and the presence of fusion. The canal configuration of teeth with separate and fused roots was compared. Type of fusion and canal merging positions were determined. A P value of less than 0.05 was considered significant.ResultsFive hundred and seventy-one (92.69%) MFMs had three separate roots, one (0.16%) had four roots and the incidence of root fusion was 7.14%. An additional mesiobuccal (MB) canal was present in 79.34% of the teeth with three separate roots. There was no merging of canals in 36 of 44 teeth with fused roots. The prevalence of fusion was higher in the MSMs (23.47%). The incidence of three and four separate roots in MSM teeth was 74.68% and 1.85%, respectively. The prevalence of additional MB canals in teeth with three separate roots was 53.14%. There was no canal merging in 60% of the fused rooted teeth. There were two-merged canals in 31.52% and multiple merged canals in 8.48% of the MSMs.ConclusionsIn the Turkish population, the incidence of root fusion in the MFMs and MSMs was 7.14% and 23.47%, respectively, with more canal merging in the MSMs.

21 keywords...

hide…