Endodontic and periodontal disease are distinct etiologies that can lead to odontogenic sinusitis (ODS). Apical periodontitis and periodontitis are both polymicrobial infections but with different pathogens affecting different parts of the tooth and alveolar bone. Diagnosing both conditions requires specific clinical examination in addition to radiographic assessment. Understanding the terminology and pathophysiology of these conditions and how they are identified should improve diagnostic and therapeutic outcomes, as well as future ODS research.

UNASSIGNED: The aim of this case report is to present three different patients who had horizontal and vertical root fractures of young permanent teeth, its diagnosis, clinical and radiographic findings, treatment, and long-term follow-up and success rate.
UNASSIGNED: Root fractures are relatively rare with the prevalence of 0.5-7% in permanent and 2-4% in deciduous dentition. Timely intervention and accurate treatment procedures are the main concerns for long-term success of root fractures.
UNASSIGNED: Case I and case II had horizontal fracture of immature permanent tooth. Patients reported with a chief complaint of pain in their upper central incisors. As a result of radiographic examination, horizontal root fractures were diagnosed. Teeth were treated with a mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) plug (case I and case II) and repositioning and splinting (case II). Case III had vertical root fracture of immature permanent tooth. Tooth was treated with apexification (sectional obturation) and sealed with resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC) till the fracture site and flowable light cure restoration. Patients were scheduled for follow-up visits at different time intervals. Radiographic evidence indicated ongoing root development in these immature teeth. Normal color and mobility were observed, and no pain was noted during horizontal and vertical percussion tests.
UNASSIGNED: The present case report shows a favorable and stable outcome of timely treatment and sound healing of various types of root fracture. Long-term follow-up of patients with trauma is essential because pathological changes can occur several years following injury.
UNASSIGNED: The latest treatment modalities and long-term follow-up showed clinical success.
UNASSIGNED: Dhindsa A, Garg S, Poddar P, et al. Management of Root Fractures in Young Immature Permanent Teeth: Three Case Reports. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2024;17(3):352-356.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to develop an evidence-based clinical imaging guideline for teeth suspected with vertical root fractures.
METHODS: An adaptation methodology based on the Korean Clinical Imaging Guidelines (K-CIG) was used in the guideline development process. After searching for guidelines using major databases such as Ovid-Medline, Elsevier-Embase, National Guideline Clearinghouse, and Guideline International Network, as well as domestic databases such as KoreaMed, KMbase, and KoMGI, two reviewers analyzed the retrieved articles. The retrieved articles were included in this review using well-established inclusion criteria.
RESULTS: Twenty articles were identified through an online search, of which three were selected for guideline development. Based on these three guidelines, this study developed specific recommendations concerning the optimal imaging modality for diagnosing teeth suspected of vertical root fractures.
CONCLUSIONS: Periapical radiography is the preferred method for assessing teeth with mastication-related pain and suspected vertical root fractures. However, if intraoral radiographs do not provide sufficient information about root fractures, a small FOV CBCT may be considered. However, the use of CBCT in endodontically treated teeth is significantly constrained by the presence of artificial shading.

UNASSIGNED: The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy of two different electronic apex locators (EALs) in detecting simulated incomplete vertical root fractures (VRFs).
UNASSIGNED: Thirty freshly extracted single-rooted teeth were randomly divided into three groups of 10 teeth each labeled as Groups A, B, and C. Incomplete VRFs were simulated in the coronal, middle, and apical one-third of the roots for Groups A, B, and C, respectively. The teeth were embedded in alginate mold and fracture location was determined with Root ZX and Propex EALs for each sample and each group. To calculate the actual length (AL), each sample was sectioned at the upper level of the vertical fracture, and the length was measured by setting the stopper of the #10 K file under a stereomicroscope at ×30 magnification. The electronic lengths and ALs were compared using computer software, and the results were analyzed using SPSS 28.0 at a 95% confidence level.
UNASSIGNED: No significant differences were seen in the accuracy of the two EALs when compared with ALs. Root ZX showed significantly longer measurements than ALs in groups B and C.
UNASSIGNED: The tested EALs showed low accuracy (20%) in detecting simulated incomplete VRFs with a tendency for longer measurements compared to ALs.

The evidence base on minimally invasive endodontic (MIE) treatment is limited. This study investigated the influence of MIE shaping on vertical root fracture (VRF) resistance and crack formation of root canal filled teeth. Human maxillary central incisors were randomized into six groups (n = 18, power = 0.9) and embedded in acrylic blocks with artificial periodontal ligaments. The root canals were either instrumented to size #40 and 0.04 taper (+MIE) or enlarged to ISO size #80 (-MIE). The canals were filled with cement-based (C) or adhesive resin-based (A) sealers in single-cone technique. The controls received no treatment or were left unfilled. After chewing simulation (staircase method, 25-150 N, 120,000×), the crack formation on the root surface was analyzed using stereomicroscope/digital imaging and classified (no defect, craze line, vertical crack, horizontal crack). Subsequently, the samples were loaded until fracture. The incidence of defects (56% vertical cracks) was not significantly different between the groups (p ≥ 0.077). VRF resistance was significantly higher in untreated teeth than in +MIE/C (p = 0.020) but did not significantly differ between the other groups (p ≥ 0.068). Minimal canal shaping did not reduce the risk of vertical root fracture and defects of root canal filled teeth.

Cemental tears are often misdiagnosed due to their scarcity. In this study, we reported the second largest cohort of cemental tears thus far. By reviewing the radiographic data and medical records of 63 cemental tear teeth, we found that periapical periodontitis was the most frequent diagnosis, followed by cracked tooth/root fracture and periodontitis. Most of the cemental tear teeth that did not have root canal treatment had vital pulp. The apical third of the root was the most prominent site of cemental tears. Cemental tears occurred more frequently in the palatal root of the maxillary molars and in the mesial root of the two-root mandibular molars. Uncontrollable bone loss and tooth mobility were the two main reasons for the extraction of teeth with cemental tears. We suggest that cemental tears should be included in the differential diagnosis of periapical periodontitis, cracked tooth, vertical root fracture and periodontitis, especially for teeth with periapical radiolucency and vital pulp. We believe our study could provide more insights into cemental tears, which will aid clinicians in the early diagnosis and proper treatment of cemental tears.

BACKGROUND: This retrospective clinical study aimed to compare the sensitivity of cone-beam computed tomographic (CBCT) images and periapical (PA) radiographs to reveal cracked teeth, split teeth, and teeth with vertical root fractures (VRFs).
METHODS: The authors included 98 patients (98 teeth) diagnosed with a longitudinal tooth fracture (LTF) (cracked tooth, split tooth, VRF) through direct visualization after extraction and with comprehensive clinical and radiographic records. They collected demographic, clinical, and radiographic data. The authors evaluated PA radiographs and CBCT images to identify fractures, fracture lines, and the different patterns of bone loss associated with these teeth. They used the McNemar test to compare PA radiographs and CBCT scans when assessing bone loss. They used the Fisher test to determine statistical relationships between fracture types and demographic, clinical, and radiologic traits. They used an analysis of variance test to compare patient age with fracture types.
RESULTS: CBCT images were significantly more effective (P < .05) in detecting bone loss patterns associated with LTFs than with PA radiographs, with 71% of cases detected via CBCT images compared with 42% via radiographs. Mean age was significantly greater (P < .05) in patients with teeth with VRFs than in patients with split teeth. A significant relationship was observed between the type of fracture and the following variables: root canal treatment (split, VRF, P = .002), deep probing depth (≥ 5 mm) (VRF, P = .026), and having more than 8 teeth extracted from the mouth (VRF, P = .032). Overall, there was a significant difference (P < .001) between the visualization of fracture lines (45% on PA radiographs, 65% on CBCT images).
CONCLUSIONS: CBCT scans provided more information on LTFs than PA radiographs, particularly in the identification of periradicular bone changes.
CONCLUSIONS: CBCT imaging can assist in making the clinical diagnosis of LTFs through observation of bone loss patterns, providing more information than PA radiographs.

OBJECTIVE: This study used image-based finite element analysis (FEA) to assess the biomechanical changes in mandibular first molars resulting from alterations in the position of the root canal isthmus.
METHODS: A healthy mandibular first molar, characterized by two intact root canals and a cavity-free surface, was selected as the subject. A three-dimensional model for the molar was established using scanned images of the patient\'s mandibular teeth. Subsequently, four distinct finite element models were created, each representing varied root canal morphologies: non-isthmus (Group A), isthmus located at the upper 1/3 of the root (Group B), middle 1/3 of the root (Group C), and lower 1/3 of the root (Group D). A static load of 200 N was applied along the tooth\'s longitudinal axis on the occlusal surface to simulate regular chewing forces. The biomechanical assessment was conducted regarding the mechanical stress profile within the root dentin. The equivalent stress (Von Mises stress) was used to assess the biomechanical features of mandibular teeth under mechanical loading.
RESULTS: In Group A (without an isthmus), the maximum stress was 22.2 MPa, while experimental groups with an isthmus exhibited higher stresses, reaching up to 29.4 MPa. All maximum stresses were concentrated near the apical foramen. The presence of the isthmus modified the stress distribution in the dentin wall of the tooth canal. Notably, dentin stresses at specific locations demonstrated differences: at 8 mm from the root tip, Group B: 13.6 MPa vs. Group A: 11.4 MPa; at 3 mm from the root tip, Group C: 14.2 MPa vs. Group A: 4.5 MPa; at 1 mm from the root tip, Group D: 25.1 MPa vs. Group A: 10.3 MPa. The maximum stress in the root canal dentin within the isthmus region was located either at the top or bottom of the isthmus.
CONCLUSIONS: A root canal isthmus modifies the stress profile within the dentin. The maximum stress occurs near the apical foramen and significantly increases when the isthmus is located closer to the apical foramina.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this retrospective study was to investigate the risk of tooth loss for teeth adjacent and nonadjacent to dental implants.
METHODS: A total of 787 patients with an average follow-up of 57.1 months were examined to define the tooth loss, cumulative survival rate, and odds ratio (OR) for teeth adjacent versus nonadjacent to implants. A multivariate logistic regression was employed to assess the association between dental history and various recorded etiologies of tooth loss among teeth adjacent to implants.
RESULTS: The incidence of tooth loss for teeth adjacent to implants was 8.1% at the tooth level and 15.1% at the patient level, while 0.7% and 9.5% at the tooth and patientlevel for teeth nonadjacent to implants. The 10-year cumulative survival rate for teeth adjacent to implants was 89.2%, and the primary etiology of tooth loss was root fracture (45.2%). The risk of tooth loss among teeth adjacent versus nonadjacent to implants was significantly higher (OR 13.15). Among teeth adjacent to implants, root canal-treated teeth had a significantly higher risk of tooth loss due to root fracture (OR 7.72), a history of existing restoration significantly increased the risk of tooth loss due to caries (OR 3.05), and a history of periodontitis significantly increased the risk of tooth loss due to periodontitis (OR 38.24).
CONCLUSIONS: The present study demonstrated that after patients received dental implant treatment, teeth adjacent to implants showed a 13.2-fold higher risk of tooth loss compared to teeth nonadjacent to implants, with the primary etiology being root fracture.

BACKGROUND: Up to 25% of the tooth extraction after root canal treatment could be attributed to the vertical root fracture (VRF). The treatment choice for teeth with VRF would mostly be the extraction despite some repairing methods were also reported. The repairing treatment result of VRF would mostly depend on the fixation strength and the bioactivity of the repairing materials, especially for the posterior teeth with high masticating stresses. This case report designed a novel surgical treatment approach for the VRF of posterior teeth.
METHODS: a maxillary premolar with buccal-palatal complete VRF was treated with a new dual-layered repairing approach using adhesive resin + iRoot BP Plus bioceramic cement to fill the modified fracture line with retention forms through the intentional replantation.
RESULTS: At the 24-month review, the tooth showed desirable periodontal healing and normal function.
CONCLUSIONS: This case report indicated that the dual-layered repairing approach might be effective for saving the posterior teeth with VRF. Nevertheless, further clinical trials are needed for its long-term result.