The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Related articles

VOLUME 18 , ISSUE 6 ( June, 2017 ) > List of Articles

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Assessment of Root Resorption and Root Shape by Periapical and Panoramic Radiographs: A Comparative Study

Atul Bhardwaj, Puneeta D Ahuja, Sheetal P Mhaske, Gaurav Mishra, Ruby Dwivedi

Citation Information : Bhardwaj A, Ahuja PD, Mhaske SP, Mishra G, Dwivedi R. Assessment of Root Resorption and Root Shape by Periapical and Panoramic Radiographs: A Comparative Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2017; 18 (6):479-483.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-2069

Published Online: 01-06-2017

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2017; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.


Abstract

Introduction

One of the common findings encountered by the clinician at the end of orthodontic treatment is the apical root resorption. Root resorption occurs to various degrees. A severe form of root resorption is characterized by shortening of root for more than 4 mm or more than one-third of the total tooth length. A low incidence rate of resorption is observed based on radiographic findings for the diagnosis of root resorption, panoramic radiography, and periapical radiography. Hence, we evaluated the accuracy of panoramic radiographic films for assessing the root resorption in comparison with the periapical films.

Materials and methods

This study included the assessment of all the cases in which pre- and post-treatment radiographs were available for analysis of the assessment of the amount of root resorption. Complete records of 80 patients were analyzed. Examination of a total of 900 teeth was done. Mean age of the patients in this study was 21 years ranging from 11 to 38 years. The majority of the patients in the present study were females. All the treatments were carried out by registered orthodontists having minimum experience of more than 10 years. All the cases were divided into two study groups. Group I comprised panoramic radiographic findings, while group II consisted of periapical radiographic findings. For the measurement of crown portion, root portion, and the complete root length, magnification loops of over 100 powers with parallax correction with inbuilt grids were used. Assessment of the tooth length and the crown length was done by the same observers. All the results were analyzed by Statistical Package for the Social Sciences software version 6.0.

Results

Maximum amount of root resorption was observed in case of maxillary central incisors and canines among group I and II cases respectively. However, nonsignificant difference was obtained while comparing the mean root resorption in relation to maxillary incisors and canines among the two study groups. While comparing the overall value of root resorption among the two study groups, a significant difference was obtained. The maximum value of tooth length in both the groups was observed in cases of maxillary canines. Significant differences were observed while comparing the tooth length of various teeth among the two study groups. Among the deviated forms of root shape, dilaceration was the most common form of root shape detected in both the study groups.

Conclusion

Periapical radiographs are more efficient in the assessment of the shape and resorption of the root.

Clinical significance

Thorough evaluation of periapical radiographs is necessary for detection of even minute levels of root resorption.

How to cite this article

Ahuja PD, Mhaske SP, Mishra G, Bhardwaj A, Dwivedi R, Mangalekar SB. Assessment of Root Resorption and Root Shape by Periapical and Panoramic Radiographs: A Comparative Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2017;18(6):479-483.


PDF Share
  1. Levels of root resorption associated with continuous arch and sectional arch mechanics. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1996 Sep;110(3):321-324.
  2. A radiographic comparison of apical root resorption after orthodontic treatment with the edgewise and Speed appliances. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1995 Jul;108(1):76-84.
  3. Root resorption during Begg treatment: a longitudinal roentgenologic study. Am J Orthod 1975 Jul;68(1):55-66.
  4. Patient characteristics and treatment variables associated with apical root resorption during orthodontic treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1991 Jan;99(1):35-43.
  5. Severe root resorption in orthodontic patients treated with the edgewise method: prevalence and predictive factors. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2010 Mar;137(3):384-388.
  6. Risk factors for apical root resorption of maxillary anterior teeth in adult orthodontic patients. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1995 Jul;108(3):48-55.
  7. Radiographic examinations of orthodontic educators and practitioners. J Dent Educ 1986 Nov;50(11):651-655.
  8. ; Jansen, L. Dental radiology: principles and techniques. 2nd ed. Philadelphia, (PA): WB Saunders; 2000. p. 342-362.
  9. Accuracy of dimensional and angular measurements from panoramic and lateral oblique radiographs. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1995 Jan;24(4):225-231.
  10. Apical root resorption of incisors after orthodontic treatment of impacted maxillary canines: a radiographic study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2012 Apr;141(4):427-435.
  11. Comparison of two cone beam computed tomographic systems vs panoramic imaging for localization of impacted maxillary canines and detection of root resorption. Eur J Orthod 2011 Feb;33(1):93-102.
  12. Pre-treatment radiographic features predict root resorption of treated impacted maxillary central incisors. Orthod Craniofac Res 2012 Aug;15(3):198-205.
  13. Predicting and preventing root resorption: part II. Treatment factors. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2001 May;119(5):511-515.
  14. Assessment of root resorption and root shape: periapical vs panoramic films. Angle Orthod 2001 Jun;71(3):185-189.
  15. Orthodontic radiography guidelines. 1st ed. London: British Orthodontic Society; 1994.
  16. Diagnostic accuracy and observer performance in the diagnosis of abnormalities in the anterior maxilla: a comparison of panoramic with intraoral radiography. Br Dent J 1992 Nov;173(8):265-271.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.