Volume : 10, Issue : 12, December – 2023
Title:
ENDODONTIC COMPLICATIONS: CAUSES, PREVENTIVE STRATEGIES AND THEIR IMPACT ON TREATMENT OUTCOME
Authors :
Raif Rashad Marqoshi, Majed Mansour Alsuwaida, Ahmed Abdulkhaleq Banafea, Fatimah Adel Madani, Mohammed Ahmed Al Qadhi, Ahmed Saleh Almoabadi, Abdullah Abdulmalak Altwalh, Abdulrahman Moedh Alqhtani, Othman Harb AlOthman, Shatha Faisel Haneef, Dema Khalid Abughaliah, Thamer Rashed Alharbi, Abdulmajid Ahmed Masoudi and Hoda Jehad Abousada
Abstract :
Objective: This study aims to investigate the causes of endodontic complications, develop evidence-based preventive strategies, and assess their impact on treatment outcomes to enhance the quality and success of endodontic procedures
Methods: A cross-sectional study design will be implemented to examine the etiology of endodontic complications, identify preventive strategies, and evaluate their effect on treatment outcomes. This approach facilitates the collection of data from a diverse sample at a single point in time, offering a snapshot of the current situation.
Results: The study comprised 667 participants. The most represented age group was over 45 years (n=157, 24%), followed by those aged 25-30 years (n=142, 21.3%). Females were the majority among the participants (n=364, 54.6%), with males constituting 45.4% (n=303). The highest educational level was a diploma or bachelor’s degree (n=455, 68.2%), and the next was high school (n=126, 18.9%). When it came to income, most participants were in the middle bracket (n=507, 76%), with the high-income bracket next (n=85, 12.7%), and the lowest income bracket was the least common (n=75, 11.2%). Regarding satisfaction with their root canal treatment, most participants reported being very satisfied (n=226, 34%), with a neutral response as the next most frequent (n=202, 30%). In terms of complications, the largest group of respondents did not know which complications they encountered (n=334, 46.3%), followed by those reporting pain after surgery (n=242, 33.6%). The most cited source of information was the dentist (n=285, 42.7%).
Conclusion: The results suggest that the study’s participant demographic primarily included middle-income individuals with at least a diploma or bachelor’s degree. Information about endodontic treatments was predominantly provided by dentists. Participants generally reported high satisfaction with root canal treatments and demonstrated robust social communication.
Cite This Article:
Please cite this article in press Majed Mansour Alsuwaida et al., Endodontic Complications: Causes, Preventive Strategies And Their Impact On Treatment Outcome, Indo Am. J. P. Sci, 2023; 10 (12).
Number of Downloads : 10
References:
1. Siqueira Jr JF, Rôças IN. Clinical implications and microbiology of bacterial persistence after treatment procedures. Journal of endodontics. 2008 Nov 1;34(11):1291-301.
2. Ng YL, Mann V, Rahbaran S, Lewsey J, Gulabivala K. Outcome of primary root canal treatment: systematic review of the literature–Part 2. Influence of clinical factors. International endodontic journal. 2008 Jan;41(1):6-31.
3. Hülsmann M, Peters OA, Dummer PM. Mechanical preparation of root canals: shaping goals, techniques and means. Endodontic topics. 2005 Mar;10(1):30-76.
4. Nair PN. On the causes of persistent apical periodontitis: a review. International endodontic journal. 2006 Apr;39(4):249-81.
5. Bergenholtz G. Assessment of treatment failure in endodontic therapy. J Oral Rehabil 2016;43(10):753–758.
6. Plotino G, Grande NM, Mazza C, et al. Influence of size and taper of artificial canals on the trajectory of NiTi rotary instruments in cyclic fatigue studies. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2010;109(1):e60–e66.
7. Gambarini G, Seracchiani M, Piasecki L, et al. Measurement of torque generated during intracanal instrumentation in vivo. Int Endod J 2019;52(5):737–745.
8. Alghamdi F, Alhaddad AJ, Abuzinadah S. Healing of periapical lesions after surgical endodontic retreatment: a systematic review. Cureus 2020;12(2):e6916.
9. Prada I, Mico-Munoz P, Giner-Lluesma T, et al. Influence of microbiology on endodontic failure. Literature review. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal 2019;24(3):e364–e372.
10. Gambarini G, Piasecki L, Miccoli G, et al. Cone-beam computed tomography in the assessment of periapical lesions in endodontically treated teeth. Eur J Dent 2018;12(1):136–143.
11. Figueiredo FE, Martins-Filho PR, Faria-E-Silva AL. Do metal post-retained restorations result in more root fractures than fiber post-retained restorations? A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Endod 2015;41(3):309–316.
12. Gambarini G, Piasecki L, Miccoli G, et al. Classification and cyclic fatigue evaluation of new kinematics for endodontic instruments. Aust Endod J 2019;45(2):154–162.
13. Gambarini G, Miccoli G, Seracchiani M, et al. Fatigue resistance of new and used nickel-titanium rotary instruments: a comparative study. Clin Ter 2018;169(3):e96–e101.
14. Gambarini G, Di Nardo D, Miccoli G, et al. The influence of a new clinical motion for endodontic instruments on the incidence of postoperative pain. Clin Ter 2017;168(1):e23–e27.
15. Guarnieri R, Di Nardo D, Gaimari G, et al. Short vs. standard laser-microgrooved implants supporting single and splinted crowns: a prospective study with 3 years follow-up. J Prosthodont 2019;28(2):771–779.