您的位置:山东大学 -> 科技期刊社 -> 《山东大学学报(医学版)》

山东大学学报 (医学版) ›› 2021, Vol. 59 ›› Issue (8): 74-79.doi: 10.6040/j.issn.1671-7554.0.2021.0269

• • 上一篇    下一篇

800颗上颌第一前磨牙颊根腭侧面沟和根管的CBCT影像形态学观察

尹增正1,2,3,聂晓琨4,王煜1,2,3,马志德1,2,3,熊世江1,2,3   

  • 出版日期:2021-08-10 发布日期:2021-09-16
  • 通讯作者: 熊世江. E-mail:xiongsj@sdu.edu.cn

Morphological observation of the CBCT image about the furcation groove and root canal of 800 maxillary first premolars

YIN Zengzheng1,2,3, NIE Xiaokun4, WANG Yu1,2,3, MA Zhide1,2,3, XIONG Shijiang1,2,3   

  1. 1. Department of VIP, School and Hospital of Stomatology, Cheeloo College of Medicine, Shandong University, Jinan 250012, Shandong, China;
    2. Shandong Key Laboratory of Oral Tissue Regeneration, Jinan 250012, Shandong, China;
    3. Shandong Engineering Laboratory for Dental Materials and Oral Tissue Regeneration, Jinan 250012, Shandong, China;
    4. The First Department of Cariology and Endodontics, Jinan Stomatology Hospital, Jinan 250001, Shandong, China
  • Online:2021-08-10 Published:2021-09-16

摘要: 目的 采用口腔锥形束CT(CBCT)技术对上颌第一前磨牙的牙根、根管及颊根腭侧面沟的形态进行研究,为临床诊疗提供理论依据。 方法 观测就诊于山东大学口腔医院的400例患者的800颗上颌第一前磨牙CBCT影像,以Vertucci分类法为依据,确定牙根和根管的形态,对有颊根腭侧面沟的上颌第一前磨牙进行形态学研究。 结果 上颌第一前磨牙最常见牙根类型为单根型(62.6%),其次为双根型(36.1%),三根型(1.3%)较少见。根管形态中最常见的为Ⅳ型,约占44.0%,然后依次是Ⅱ型、Ⅰ型和Ⅲ型。61.6%的双根型可以观察到颊根腭侧面沟,沟的平均深度和长度分别为0.60、3.25 mm,对应的腭侧壁的最小厚度平均值为0.59 mm。 结论 上颌第一前磨牙牙根及根管形态复杂,颊根腭侧面沟的存在加大了根管治疗的难度,对上颌第一前磨牙牙根、根管形态和颊根腭侧面沟形态的研究,有助于口腔医生了解其解剖特征,提高根管治疗的成功率。

关键词: 上颌第一前磨牙, 颊根腭侧面沟, 锥形束CT, 根管解剖, 发生率

Abstract: Objective To investigate the number of roots, root canal types, incidence of furcation groove and morphological characteristics of the maxillary first premolars, so as to provide theoretical basis for the clinical diagnosis and treatment. Methods CBCT images of 800 maxillary first premolars from 400 patients treated at Shandong University Stomatological Hospital were observed. Based on the Vertucci classification, the morphology of the root and root canal were determined, and a morphological study on the maxillary first premolars with furcation groove was conducted. Results The most common root type of maxillary first premolars was 1 root(62.6%), followed by 2 roots(36.1%), and 3 roots(1.3%). The most common root canal type was type Ⅳ(44.0%), followed by type Ⅱ, type Ⅰ and type Ⅲ. The furcation groove was observed in 61.6% of the double-rooted maxillary first premolars, the average depth of the groove was 0.60 mm, the average length was 3.25 mm, and the average value of the minimum thickness of the corresponding palatal sidewall was 0.59 mm. Conclusion The shape of the root and root canal of the maxillary first premolar is complex, and the presence of the furcation groove further increases the difficulty of root canal treatment. Observing the morphology of root, root canal and furcation groove of the maxillary first premolars can help dentists understand the anatomical characteristics and improve the success rate of root canal treatment.

Key words: Maxillary first premolar, Furcation groove, Cone-beam computed tomography, Root canal morphology, Incidence

中图分类号: 

  • R781
[1] 陈媛媛, 张文汇, 郭斌, 等. 比较注射冲洗与辅助超声荡洗对根管清洁效果的系统评价[J]. 华西口腔医学杂志, 2015, 33(2): 145-152. CHEN Yuanyaun, ZHANG Wenhui, GUO Bin, et al. Cleaning effect of ultrasonic activation as an adjunct to syringe irrigation of root canals: a systematic review[J]. West China Journal of Stomatology, 2015, 33(2): 145-152.
[2] Vertucci F, Seelig A, Gillis R. Root canal morphology of the human maxillary second premolar[J]. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol, 1974, 38(3): 456-464.
[3] Ahmad IA, Alenezi MA. Root and root canal morphology of maxillary first premolars: a literature review and clinical considerations[J]. Endod, 2016, 42(6): 861-872.
[4] Kaya Büyükbayram I, Sübay RK, Colakoglu G, et al. Investigation using cone beam computed tomography analysis, of radicular grooves and canal configurations of mandibular premolars in a Turkish subpopulation[J]. Arch Oral Biol, 2019, 107:104517. doi: 10.1016/j.archoralbio.2019.104517.
[5] Abella F, Teixidó LM, Patel S, et al. Cone-beam computed tomography analysis of the root canal morphology of maxillary first and second premolars in a Spanish population[J]. Endod, 2015, 41(8): 1241-1247.
[6] Pekiner FN, Borahan MO, Dumlu A. Evaluation of distolingual canal/roots in mandibular molars and mesiobuccal canals in maxillary molars by CBCT[J]. Open Dent J, 2017, 11(10): 360-366.
[7] Neelakantan P, Subbarao C, Subbarao CV. Comparative evaluation of modified canal staining and clearing technique, cone-beam computed tomography, peripheral quantitative computed tomography, spiral computed tomography, and plain and contrast medium-enhanced digital radiography in studying root canal morphology[J]. Endod, 2010, 36(9): 1547-1551.
[8] 姚雪芹, 李海燕, 李向明, 等. 上颌第一前磨牙根管形态的锥形束CT研究[J]. 北京口腔医学, 2019, 27(2): 100-104.
[9] Liu X, Gao M, Bai Q, et al. Evaluation of palatal furcation groove and root canal anatomy of maxillary first premolar: a CBCT and Micro-CT study[J]. Biomed Res Int, 2021, 2021: 8862956. doi: 10.1155/2021/8862956.
[10] Cheng XL, Weng YL. Observation of the roots and root canals of 442 maxillary first premolars[J]. Shanghai Kou Qiang Yi Xue, 2008, 17(5): 525-528.
[11] Kfir A, Mostinsky O, Elyzur O, et al. Root canal configuration and root wall thickness of first maxillary premolars in an Israeli population. a Cone-beam computed tomography study[J]. Sci Rep, 2020, 10(1): 434.
[12] Abella F, Teixidó LM, Patel S, et al. Cone-beam computed tomography analysis of the root canal morphology of maxillary first and second premolars in a Spanish population[J]. Endod, 2015, 41(8): 1241-1247.
[13] Jafarzadeh H. Endodontic treatment of bilaterally occurring three-rooted maxillary premolars: a case report[J]. N Z Dent J, 2007, 103(2): 37-38.
[14] Loh HS. Root morphology of the maxillary first premolar in Singaporeans[J]. Aust Dent J, 1998, 43(6): 399-402.
[15] Carns EJ, Skidmore AE. Configurations and deviations of root canals of maxillary first premolars[J]. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol, 1973, 36(6): 880-886.
[16] Bürklein S, Heck R, Schäfer E. Evaluation of the root canal anatomy of maxillary and mandibular premolars in a selected German population using cone-beam computed tomographic data[J]. Endod, 2017, 43(9): 1448-1452.
[17] 张庆, 杨洪, 陆明辉. 上颌第一前磨牙三个根及三根管两例[J]. 中华口腔医学研究杂志(电子版), 2013, 7(1): 75-76.
[18] 孔倩颖, 梁立中, 王广勇, 等. 上颌前磨牙牙根及根管形态的锥形束CT研究[J]. 口腔疾病防治, 2020, 28(4): 246-251.
[19] Garcia GD, Najera RI, Cepeda SE, et al. Endodontic management of a three rooted maxillary premolar: a report of 3 cases[J]. Clin Diagn Res, 2016, 10(6): ZJ05-06.
[20] Li YH, Bao SJ, Yang XW, et al. Symmetry of root anatomy and root canal morphology in maxillary premolars analyzed using cone-beam computed tomography[J]. Arch Oral Biol, 2018, 94: 84-92. doi: 10.1016/j.archoralbio.2018.06.020.
[21] 汤道芳, 刘凯, 查光玉, 等. 754颗上颌第一前磨牙牙根数目及根管形态的CBCT图像分析[J]. 丽水学院学报, 2020, 42(2): 54-59.
[22] Saber SEDM, Ahmed MHM, Obeid M, et al. Root and canal morphology of maxillary premolar teeth in an Egyptian subpopulation using two classification systems: a cone beam computed tomography study[J]. Int Endod J, 2019, 52(3): 267-278.
[23] Alqedairi A, Alfawaz H, Al-Dahman Y, et al. Cone-beam computed tomographic evaluation of root canal morphology of maxillary premolars in a Saudi population[J]. Biomed Res Int, 2018, 2018: 8170620. doi: 10.1155/2018/8170620.
[24] 孙剑, 扬宏军, 李景, 等. 脱位再植牙牙髓不同处理方法对比研究[J]. 现代口腔医学杂志, 2002(4): 355-356. SUN Jian, YANG Hongjun, LI Jing, et al. Comparative study on different pulp treatment in replanted teeth[J]. Journal of Modern Stomatology, 2002(4): 355-356.
[25] Tamse A, Fuss Z, Lustig J, et al. An evaluation of endodontically treated vertically fractured teeth[J]. Endod, 1999, 25(7): 506-508.
[26] Lammertyn PA, Rodrigo SB, Brunotto M, et al. Furcation groove of maxillary first premolar, thickness, and dentin structures[J]. Endod, 2009, 35(6): 814-817.
[1] 刘学业,李齐明,唐弘毅,徐秋平,陈文倩,郭泾. 年轻成人颞下颌关节髁突体积、表面积与关节盘矢向位置的关系[J]. 山东大学学报 (医学版), 2021, 59(6): 117-121.
[2] 张冰,贾凌璐,贾婷婷,张云鹏,文勇,徐欣. 上颌窦外侧壁牙槽管解剖的锥形束CT研究[J]. 山东大学学报(医学版), 2016, 54(5): 92-96.
[3] 李德水, 刘盼盼, 史晓昕, 郭泾. 正畸美学区的CBCT测量分析[J]. 山东大学学报(医学版), 2015, 53(2): 75-80.
[4] MICHAEL M. P. NG'WANAMASELE, 韩延钊, 张风河, 佟冬冬, 李亮, 程慧娟, 王春玲, 刘东旭. 三维配准方法评价下颌后退手术后上呼吸道的形态学变化[J]. 山东大学学报(医学版), 2014, 52(10): 61-65,71.
[5] 张云鹏, 文勇, 唐翠竹, 张冰, 占发龙, 徐欣. 上颌后牙牙根与毗邻解剖结构关系的锥形束CT分析[J]. 山东大学学报(医学版), 2014, 52(10): 66-71.
[6] 刘盼盼1,2,谢志伟1,2,李国菊2,3,郭泾1,2. 汉族均角成年人群下颌体形态的测量分析[J]. 山东大学学报(医学版), 2013, 51(12): 95-99.
[7] . 济南铁路工人高血压前期的发生率及影响因素研究[J]. 山东大学学报(医学版), 2009, 47(9): 137-140.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
[1] 索东阳,申飞,郭皓,刘力畅,杨惠敏,杨向东. Tim-3在药物性急性肾损伤动物模型中的表达及作用机制[J]. 山东大学学报 (医学版), 2020, 1(7): 1 -6 .
[2] 张宝文,雷香丽,李瑾娜,罗湘俊,邹容. miR-21-5p靶向调控TIMP3抑制2型糖尿病肾病小鼠肾脏系膜细胞增殖及细胞外基质堆积[J]. 山东大学学报 (医学版), 2020, 1(7): 7 -14 .
[3] 龙婷婷,谢明,周璐,朱俊德. Noggin蛋白对小鼠脑缺血再灌注损伤后学习和记忆能力与齿状回结构的影响[J]. 山东大学学报 (医学版), 2020, 1(7): 15 -23 .
[4] 付洁琦,张曼,张晓璐,李卉,陈红. Toll样受体4抑制过氧化物酶体增殖物激活受体γ加重血脂蓄积的分子机制[J]. 山东大学学报 (医学版), 2020, 1(7): 24 -31 .
[5] 马青源,蒲沛东,韩飞,王超,朱洲均,王维山,史晨辉. miR-27b-3p调控SMAD1对骨肉瘤细胞增殖、迁移和侵袭作用的影响[J]. 山东大学学报 (医学版), 2020, 1(7): 32 -37 .
[6] 李宁,李娟,谢艳,李培龙,王允山,杜鲁涛,王传新. 长链非编码RNA AL109955.1在80例结直肠癌组织中的表达及对细胞增殖与迁移侵袭的影响[J]. 山东大学学报 (医学版), 2020, 1(7): 38 -46 .
[7] 史爽,李娟,米琦,王允山,杜鲁涛,王传新. 胃癌miRNAs预后风险评分模型的构建与应用[J]. 山东大学学报 (医学版), 2020, 1(7): 47 -52 .
[8] 肖娟,肖强,丛伟,李婷,丁守銮,张媛,邵纯纯,吴梅,刘佳宁,贾红英. 两种甲状腺超声数据报告系统诊断效能的比较[J]. 山东大学学报 (医学版), 2020, 1(7): 53 -59 .
[9] 丁祥云,于清梅,张文芳,庄园,郝晶. 胰岛素样生长因子II在84例多囊卵巢综合征患者颗粒细胞中的表达和促排卵结局的相关性[J]. 山东大学学报 (医学版), 2020, 1(7): 60 -66 .
[10] 徐玉香,刘煜东,张蓬,段瑞生. 101例脑小血管病患者脑微出血危险因素的回顾性分析[J]. 山东大学学报 (医学版), 2020, 1(7): 67 -71 .