4.5 Article

Prevalence of apical periodontitis and root filled teeth in a Belgian subpopulation found on CBCT images

Journal

INTERNATIONAL ENDODONTIC JOURNAL
Volume 50, Issue 4, Pages 317-329

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/iej.12631

Keywords

apical periodontitis; cone-beam computed tomography; cross-sectional study; prevalence

Ask authors/readers for more resources

AimTo investigate the prevalence of apical periodontitis (AP) and root filled teeth found on cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans in a Belgian subpopulation in a retrospective cross-sectional study. MethodologyAt the university hospital of Leuven, 804 patients received a CBCT scan between 01/01/2013 and 01/01/2014. The investigated sample included 631 scans with a permanent dentition and a total of 11117 teeth. Prevalences and their confidence intervals are reported and the association between treatment, position of a tooth, gender and age with AP was determined using logistic regressions. ResultsA total of 656 teeth (5.9%) had signs of AP and 1357 teeth (12.2%) had been root filled. AP was present in 212 of the 9760 nonroot filled teeth (2.2%) and in 444 of the 1357 root filled teeth (32.7%). Adequate root fillings were detected in approximately half (49.3%) of the root filledteeth. The prevalence of AP was 22.8% when the root filling was adequate, when scored inadequate the prevalence increased to 41%. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses revealed a significant relation of tooth position and treatment with AP. No difference in the prevalence of AP between male and female patients was detected. ConclusionThe prevalence of AP was comparable with findings in other epidemiological studies. Root filled teeth had significantly more AP than nonroot filled teeth. The technical quality of the root fillings had a significant impact on the presence of AP. Therefore, emphasis on the quality of work and continuing education in the field of Endodontology must be provided in Belgium.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available