Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Importance of 3D imaging in the evaluation of root formation following regenerative endodontic procedures: a case series
  1. Morankar Rahul,
  2. Rathika Asaithambi,
  3. Richa Mishra and
  4. Nitesh Tewari
  1. Division of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry, Center for Dental Education and Research, AIIMS, New Delhi, India
  1. Correspondence to Dr Morankar Rahul; captainrahul88{at}gmail.com

Abstract

The follow-up of teeth that have undergone regenerative endodontic procedures through radiographic imaging is crucial for evaluating their success and determining their future prognosis. The periapical radiographs stand out as the primary tool for this task and are also recommended by the existing guidelines. However, two-dimensional (2D) imaging may not reveal the findings accurately, mimicking the root formation success which may not be true otherwise when assessed using cone beam CT (CBCT) imaging. This case series featuring two instances underscores the significance of CBCT in identifying such signs of failure, particularly when they might be obscured in 2D imaging.

  • Radiology (diagnostics)
  • Dentistry and oral medicine

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Footnotes

  • Contributors All authors were responsible for drafting of the text, sourcing and editing of clinical images, investigation results, drawing original diagrams and algorithms, critical revision for important intellectual content and gave final approval of the manuscript.

  • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

  • Case reports provide a valuable learning resource for the scientific community and can indicate areas of interest for future research. They should not be used in isolation to guide treatment choices or public health policy.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.