Morphology and Root Canal Configuration of Maxillary Lateral Incisors: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Overview

Journal Sci Rep

Specialty Science

Date 2024 Sep 28

PMID 39341889

Authors

Thomas Gerhard Wolf

Theodora Rempapi

Richard Johannes Wierichs

Andrea Lisa Waber

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to explore maxillary lateral incisors (MxLI) intern morphology by analyzing existing literature. We searched five electronical databases (Cochrane, Embase, LILACS, Scopus, MEDLINE via PubMed) using keywords and predefined search terms. Additional studies were identified by cross-referencing and reviewing bibliographies of relevant articles. From 92 initial studies, 27 duplicates were removed, and 65 records screened. After full-text review and hand searching were 19 studies included. The most reported root canal configurations (RCC) of MxLI were Vertucci (Ve) I (1-1-1/1; 78.1-100%), Ve II (2-2-1/1; 0.2-5%), Ve III (1-2-1/1; 0.1-14.6%), Ve IV (2-2-2/2; 0.5%), and Ve V (1-1-2/2; 0.5-4.9%). A meta-analysis of six studies from Europe and Asia indicated sex-differentiated patterns in RCC prevalence: higher occurrences of Ve II (2-2-1/1; OR [95%CI] = 1.19 [0.51, 2.73]), Ve III (1-2-1/1; (OR [95%CI] = 1.72 [0.61, 4.85]), and Ve V (1-1-2/2; (OR [95%CI] = 2.95 [1.02, 8.55]) configurations were noted in males, whereas females predominantly exhibited Ve I (1-1-1/1; [95%CI] = 0.99 [0.97, 1.02]), and Ve IV (2-2-2/2; (OR [95%CI] = 0.11 [0.01, 2.02]). Examination methods varied, with cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) being most commonly (n = 11), followed by staining & clearing (n = 5), and radiographic analysis (n = 1). The predominant RCC in MxLI is type Vertucci I. CBCT is the most common method for assessing the morphology of root canals. However, up to 20% of cases may present with complex and sex-specific patterns, highlighting the need for clinicians to be aware of these differences to prevent complications during endodontic treatments.

Citing Articles

Morphology of Maxillary Central Incisors in a Mixed Swiss-German Population by Means of Micro-CT.

Wolf T, Ottiger K, Donnermeyer D, Schumann S, Waber A Dent J (Basel). 2025; 13(2).

PMID: 39996946 PMC: 11854075. DOI: 10.3390/dj13020072.

References

Plotino G, Grande N, Pecci R, Bedini R, Pameijer C, Somma F . Three-dimensional imaging using microcomputed tomography for studying tooth macromorphology. J Am Dent Assoc. 2006; 137(11):1555-61. DOI: 10.14219/jada.archive.2006.0091. View

Higgins J, Thompson S . Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Stat Med. 2002; 21(11):1539-58. DOI: 10.1002/sim.1186. View

Weine F, HEALEY H, Gerstein H, EVANSON L . Canal configuration in the mesiobuccal root of the maxillary first molar and its endodontic significance. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1969; 28(3):419-25. DOI: 10.1016/0030-4220(69)90237-0. View

Ordinola-Zapata R, Bramante C, Versiani M, Moldauer B, Topham G, Gutmann J . Comparative accuracy of the Clearing Technique, CBCT and Micro-CT methods in studying the mesial root canal configuration of mandibular first molars. Int Endod J. 2015; 50(1):90-96. DOI: 10.1111/iej.12593. View

Martins J, Marques D, Mata A, Carames J . Root and root canal morphology of the permanent dentition in a Caucasian population: a cone-beam computed tomography study. Int Endod J. 2016; 50(11):1013-1026. DOI: 10.1111/iej.12724. View

Wierichs R, Carvalho T, Wolf T . Efficacy of a self-assembling peptide to remineralize initial caries lesions - A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Dent. 2021; 109:103652. DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2021.103652. View

Pineda F, KUTTLER Y . Mesiodistal and buccolingual roentgenographic investigation of 7,275 root canals. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1972; 33(1):101-10. DOI: 10.1016/0030-4220(72)90214-9. View

Gostemeyer G, da Mata C, McKenna G, Schwendicke F . Atraumatic vs conventional restorative treatment for root caries lesions in older patients: Meta- and trial sequential analysis. Gerodontology. 2019; 36(3):285-293. DOI: 10.1111/ger.12409. View

Wolf T, Stiebritz M, Boemke N, Elsayed I, Paque F, Wierichs R . 3-dimensional Analysis and Literature Review of the Root Canal Morphology and Physiological Foramen Geometry of 125 Mandibular Incisors by Means of Micro-Computed Tomography in a German Population. J Endod. 2020; 46(2):184-191. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2019.11.006. View

10.

Iqbal A, Karobari M, Alam M, Khattak O, Alshammari S, Adil A . Evaluation of root canal morphology in permanent maxillary and mandibular anterior teeth in Saudi subpopulation using two classification systems: a CBCT study. BMC Oral Health. 2022; 22(1):171. PMC: 9092761. DOI: 10.1186/s12903-022-02187-1. View

11.

Buchanan G, Gamieldien M, Fabris-Rotelli I, van Schoor A, Uys A . Root and canal morphology of the permanent anterior dentition in a Black South African population using cone-beam computed tomography and two classification systems. J Oral Sci. 2022; 64(3):218-223. DOI: 10.2334/josnusd.22-0027. View

12.

Bornstein M, Wolner-Hanssen A, Sendi P, von Arx T . Comparison of intraoral radiography and limited cone beam computed tomography for the assessment of root-fractured permanent teeth. Dent Traumatol. 2009; 25(6):571-577. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-9657.2009.00833.x. View

13.

Henry B, Tomaszewski K, Ramakrishnan P, Roy J, Vikse J, Loukas M . Development of the anatomical quality assessment (AQUA) tool for the quality assessment of anatomical studies included in meta-analyses and systematic reviews. Clin Anat. 2016; 30(1):6-13. DOI: 10.1002/ca.22799. View

14.

Pires M, Martins J, Rito Pereira M, Vasconcelos I, da Costa R, Duarte I . Diagnostic value of cone beam computed tomography for root canal morphology assessment - a micro-CT based comparison. Clin Oral Investig. 2024; 28(3):201. PMC: 10920457. DOI: 10.1007/s00784-024-05580-y. View

15.

Altunsoy M, Ok E, Nur B, Aglarci O, Gungor E, Colak M . A cone-beam computed tomography study of the root canal morphology of anterior teeth in a Turkish population. Eur J Dent. 2014; 8(3):302-306. PMC: 4144125. DOI: 10.4103/1305-7456.137630. View

16.

da Silva E, de Castro R, Nejaim Y, Silva A, Haiter-Neto F, Silberman A . Evaluation of root canal configuration of maxillary and mandibular anterior teeth using cone beam computed tomography: An in-vivo study. Quintessence Int. 2015; 47(1):19-24. DOI: 10.3290/j.qi.a34807. View

17.

Pan J, Parolia A, Chuah S, Bhatia S, Mutalik S, Pau A . Root canal morphology of permanent teeth in a Malaysian subpopulation using cone-beam computed tomography. BMC Oral Health. 2019; 19(1):14. PMC: 6332542. DOI: 10.1186/s12903-019-0710-z. View

18.

Mashyakhy M, Gambarini G . Root and Root Canal Morphology Differences Between Genders: A Comprehensive CBCT Study in a Saudi Population. Acta Stomatol Croat. 2019; 53(3):213-246. PMC: 6820446. DOI: 10.15644/asc53/3/5. View

19.

Schilder H . Cleaning and shaping the root canal. Dent Clin North Am. 1974; 18(2):269-96. View

20.

Page M, McKenzie J, Bossuyt P, Boutron I, Hoffmann T, Mulrow C . The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021; 372:n71. PMC: 8005924. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.n71. View