Article Sidebar

PDF
Date Published: 23/12/2021
Abstract Views: 288
Views PDF: 314
DOI: https://doi.org/10.51298/vmj.v507i2.1388
Issue
Vol. 507 No. 2 (2021)
Section
Các bài báo
How to Cite
Tri Quyết, N. ., Phú Thắng, N. ., Anh Dũng, V. ., & Thị Mai Anh, T. . (2021). APICOECTOMY WITH A SURGICAL GUIDE: APPROACH TO ANATOMICALLY CHALLENGING SCENARIOS. Vietnam Medical Journal, 507(2). https://doi.org/10.51298/vmj.v507i2.1388

APICOECTOMY WITH A SURGICAL GUIDE: APPROACH TO ANATOMICALLY CHALLENGING SCENARIOS

Nguyễn Tri Quyết1,, Nguyễn Phú Thắng2, Vũ Anh Dũng1, Trương Thị Mai Anh3
1 Thai Binh University of Medicine and Pharmacy
2 Hanoi Medical University
3 University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Vietnam National University, Hanoi

Main Article Content

Abstract

Objectives: Evaluation of accuracy and clinical safety of apicoectomy with surgery guide and a Trephine in different types of teeth. Subjects and methods: Non-controlled clinical intervention study, convenience sampling. A group of 30 patients with 44 root-ends having chronic periapical lesions, were eligible. The patients underwent root-end resection with a surgical guide and a Trephine. Evaluate the applicability of the method on different types of teeth, clinical safety, and deviation from the plan. Results: 44 root-ends were completely resected. The method can be performed in all teeth types. There were no notes of injury to adjacent anatomical structures. The resected root-end length deviation is 0.44mm (95% confidence interval: 0.3-0.54). The cross-sectional angle deviation is 4.860 (95% confidence interval: 4-5.62). The difference in resected root-end length and cross-sectional angle in different types of teeth was not statistically significant. Conclusion: Research results show accuracy and clinical safety of surgical guide, itF can be used in molars. Further research is needed.

Article Details

Keywords

Apical surgery, surgical guide, Trephine, Apicectomy

References

1. Trịnh Thị Thái Hà và cộng sự (2013), Nghiên cứu đặc điểm lâm sàng, x quang và nguyên nhân của các răng cần điều trị tủy lại. Tạp Chí Y học Thực Hành - Bộ Y Tế. số 864 (67-70), 2013.
2. M. Antal et al. (2019), Accuracy and clinical safety of guided root end resection with a trephine: a case series. Head Face Med., vol. 15, Dec. 2019. DOI: 10.1186/s13005-019-0214-8.
3. A. Chércoles-Ruiz et al. ( 2017), Endodontics, Endodontic Retreatment, and Apical Surgery Versus Tooth Extraction and Implant Placement: A Systematic Review. J. Endod., vol. 43, no. 5, pp. 679–686, May 2017. DOI: 10.1016/ j.joen.2017.01.004.
4. P. A. Gilheany et al. (1994), Apical dentin permeability and microleakage associated with root end resection and retrograde filling. J. Endod., vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 22–26, Jan. 1994. DOI: 10.1016/ s0099-2399 (06) 80022-1.
5. S. Kim et al. (2006), Modern Endodontic Surgery Concepts and Practice: A Review. J. Endod., vol. 32, no. 7, pp. 601–623, Jul. 2006. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2005.12.010.
6. B. Krastev et al. (2020), Periapical Surgery. Review. Classic vs Modern Concepts. Int. J. Med. Rev. Case Rep., no. 0, p. 1, 2020. DOI: 10.5455/IJMRCR.periapical-surgery.
7. A. Tahmaseb et al. (2018), The accuracy of static computer-aided implant surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin. Oral Implants Res., vol. 29 Suppl 16, pp. 416–435, Oct. 2018. DOI: 10.1111/clr.13346.
8. F. J. Vertucci (2005), “Root canal morphology and its relationship to endodontic procedures,” Endod. Top., vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 3–29, 2005. DOI: 10.1111/j.1601-1546.2005.00129.x.