Microscope versus endoscope in root-end management: a randomized controlled study.
The purpose of this prospective, randomized, clinical study was to monitor the outcome of periradicular surgery, in which either a surgical microscope or an endoscope was used as a magnification device. A total of 113 teeth in 70 patients were included in the study, according to specific selection criteria. The choice of endoscope or surgical microscope was made using a randomized table. One hundred cases were followed for at least 2 years. Of these, 59 root-end management procedures were performed using a microscope and 41 using an endoscope. At the 2-year follow-up they were classified into three groups (success, uncertain healing and failure) according to radiographic and clinical criteria. After a 2-year follow-up, 91 teeth (91%) healed successfully. In the group using an endoscope 90% of successful healing was achieved, while 92% of success was recorded for the group using a microscope. No statistically significant difference was found in the treatment results relating to the type of magnification device. The type of magnification device used did not seem to affect the outcome of endodontic surgery.
Taschieri
S
S
Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi, Department of Health Technologies, Dental Clinic, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.
Del Fabbro
M
M
Testori
T
T
Weinstein
R
R
D000328:Adult; D001047:Apicoectomy / Q000295:instrumentation / Q000379:methods*; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008137:Longitudinal Studies; D008297:Male; D008866:Microsurgery / Q000295:instrumentation*; D008875:Middle Aged; D010486:Periapical Tissue / Q000601:surgery*; D011446:Prospective Studies; D012390:Root Canal Therapy / Q000295:instrumentation / Q000379:methods*; D014092:Tooth Root / Q000601:surgery*; D016896:Treatment Outcome; D014945:Wound Healing