Root coral morphology of maxillary first and second molars in Turkish population according to age and sex differences

The purpose of the present study was to evaluate root canal morphology ofmaxillary first and second molars in Turkish poputalion according to age and sexdifferences. In present study one hundered maxillary first and one hundred maxillarysecond molars were used. After surface disinfection, the crown of each tooth wassectioned 1mm to the cemento-enamel junction coronally. A digital camera with highresolution was used to observe pulp chamber floor morphology at ×3 opticalmagnification. 82 of maxillary first molars were observed in rhomboid shape, 18 ofmaxillary first molars were observed in triangular shape, whereas 74 of maxillarysecond molars were observed in triangular shape, 21 of maxillary second molars wereobserved in triangular shape and 5 of maxillary second molars was observed in elipticshape. When the relationship between sex and root canal morphology was examined, itwas seen that single root canal morphology was more common in women rather thanmen (p<0.001). When the relationship age and root canal morphology was examined forboth type molars, it was seen that here the single root canal morphology increasedsingnificantly with age (p<0.001).Stereomicroskopic examination revealed that the mean interorificial distance inthe pulp chamber was significantly higher in Type III compared to the Type II canalmorphology (p<0.05). The teeth were radiographed in both the buccolingual (clinicalview) and mesiodistal (proksimal view) directions with files to calculate canal curvatureangle. The images were transferred to a personal computer and then the canal curvatureand the radius of curvature were measured according to the methods described bySchneider and Weine and Pruet. The techniques that were described by Schneider andWeine used to calculate the canal curvature angles were significantly different fromeach other (p<0.05).In maxillary first molars, the primary curvature of mesiobuccal and mesiolingualcanals in clinical view were (26.38 ± 8.19) and (35.12 ± 9.04) , respectively, whereasthe primary curvature of mesiobuccal and mesiolingual canals in proximal view were(11.12 ± 9.84) and (19.56 ± 9.79), respectively. In maxillary second molars, the primarycurvature of mesiobuccal and mesiolingual canals in clinical view were (24.45 ± 8.17)and (32.03 ± 8.15), respectively; whereas the primary curvature of mesiobuccal andmesiolingual canals in proximal view were (13.60 ± 10.95) and (21.08 ± 12.04),respectively. The mean canal curvature angles of mesiolingual canals in bothbuccolingual and mesiodistal direction were higher than the mean canal curvatures ofmesiobuccal canals for both maxillary first and second molars. In both type of molars,the mean canal curvature angles of the clinical view were greater than those of theproximal view.Before the evaluation of isthmus morphology each root was embedded in clearresin, and serial six transverse sections were made at 1mm increments. When themaxillary first molars were investigated according to classification system that wasdescribed by Kim, the observed isthmus morphologies were %34,2 Type I, %14,3 TypeII, %2,5 Type III, %27 Type IV ve %21,9 Type V. There was no Type III isthmusmorphology in the maxillary second molars when compared to maxillay first molars,however %53,7 Type I, %10,9 Type II, %14,9 Type IV and %20,5 Type V istmusmorphologies were observed.Key words: Curvature angle, interorificial distance, canal morphology, isthmus,maxillary first molar,maxillary second molar