Skip to main content
PMC home page
Anatomy Research International logoLink to Anatomy Research International
. 2013 Dec 22;2013:254250. doi: 10.1155/2013/254250

Root Anatomy and Root Canal Configuration of Human Permanent Mandibular Premolars: A Systematic Review

Jojo Kottoor 1,*, Denzil Albuquerque 2, Natanasabapathy Velmurugan 3, Jacob Kuruvilla 4
PMCID: PMC3881342  PMID: 24455268

Abstract

Introduction. Mandibular premolars have been reported with complex anatomical aberrations, making them one of the most difficult teeth to manage endodontically. Methodology. An exhaustive search was undertaken to identify associated anatomic studies of mandibular premolars through MEDLINE/PubMed database using keywords, and a systematic review of the relevant articles was performed. Chi-square test with Yates correction was performed to assess the statistical significance of any anatomic variations between ethnicities and within populations of the same ethnicity. Documented case reports of variations in mandibular premolar anatomy were also identified and reviewed. Results. Thirty-six anatomic studies were analyzed which included 12,752 first premolars and nineteen studies assessing 6646 second premolars. A significant variation in the number of roots, root canals, and apical foramen was observed between Caucasian, Indian, Mongoloid, and Middle Eastern ethnicities.The most common anatomic variation was C-shaped canals in mandibular first premolars with highest incidence in Mongoloid populations (upto 24%) while dens invaginatus was the most common developmental anomaly. Conclusions. A systematic review of mandibular premolars based on ethnicity and geographic clusters offered enhanced analysis of the prevalence of number of roots and canals, their canal configuration, and other related anatomy.

1. Introduction

A clear understanding of the anatomy of human teeth is an essential prerequisite to all dental procedures especially so in the case of root canal treatment which deals with management of the tooth's internal anatomy. The pulp space is divided into two parts: the pulp chamber, which is usually described as that portion within the crown, and the pulp canal or root canal, which lies within the confines of the root. The pulp chamber is a single cavity; the dimensions of which vary according to the outline of the crown and the structure of the roots. In multirooted teeth the depth of the pulp chamber depends upon the position of the root furcation and may extend beyond the anatomical crown [1].

The pulp space is complex; root canals may divide and rejoin, and possess forms that are considerably more involved than commonly implied. Many roots have additional canals and a variety of canal configurations. In the simplest form, each root has a single canal and a single apical foramen (Type I). Commonly, however, other canal complexities are present and exit the root as one, two, or more apical canals (Types II–VIII) [2]. This could be better understood through an insight into the development of root formation. At a more advanced stage of tooth development, when enamel and dentin formation has reached the future cementoenamel junction, the dental root begins to form from a cellular diaphragm or horizontal Hertwig's epithelial root sheath. The horizontal Hertwig's epithelial root sheath may vary in shape, depending on whether the teeth are single- or multirooted. In fact, its shape determines the number of roots in a tooth. If the diaphragm remains in the shape of a collar, a single-rooted tooth will form. On the other hand, if two or three tongues of epithelium grow towards each other from this collar to bridge the gap and fuse, two or three diaphragms evolving independently from each other will form. They will either remain fused, forming fused roots, or single roots with multiple canals, or separated, forming distinct roots in multirooted teeth [3].

Mandibular premolars typically present with a single root and a single canal. The solitary root is usually oval in cross section containing an oval cross-section canal. Canal configurations in mandibular premolars may vary significantly with respect to ethnicity, race, and sex [2]. The purpose of this paper was to perform a systematic review of the literature related to the root anatomy and root canal configuration of the permanent mandibular first and second premolars.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Literature Search and Data Extraction

An exhaustive search was undertaken through MEDLINE/PubMed database to identify published literature related to the root anatomy and root canal morphology of the permanent mandibular premolars by using key words “root canal anatomy,” “root canal morphology,” “mandibular premolars,” “mandibular first premolar,” and “mandibular second premolar,” alone or in combination. Related anatomic studies of human permanent mandibular premolars were identified and a literature review was performed for articles dated July 2013 and before. The data was analyzed according to the population ethnicity and demography, number of teeth per study (power), number of roots, number of root canals, method of tooth analysis, root canal patterns, and number of apical foramina. Additionally, documented case reports of anatomic variations and developmental anomalies were identified and reviewed. Statistical comparisons were done between ethnicities and within populations of particular ethnicities using Chi-square test with Yates correction to allow for better understanding of the variations and the statistical significance of these variations in radicular anatomy of mandibular premolars based on the data collected through the systemic review.

3. Results

Thirty-six anatomic studies were analyzed which included 12,752 first premolars and nineteen studies of 6646 second premolars. A summary of the findings of different anatomic studies based on their ethnicity or geographical population assessment, with regard to the number of roots and canals has been tabulated for mandibular first premolars (Table 1) [4–38] and second premolars (Table 2) [4–7, 9, 11, 12, 15, 19, 21, 25, 29, 31–33, 35–40].

Table 1.

Summary of the incidence of documented ethnic and population variations in the anatomy of mandibular first premolars.

Geographic and ethnic
distribution		 Materials
and
methods		 No. of teeth
in the study
(n)		 Root anatomy Root canal anatomy Root canal configuration (Vertucci) Apical foramina
 References
1 root 2 roots >2 roots 1 canal 2 canals >2 canals C-shaped Type I Type II Type III Type IV Type V Type VI Type VII Type VIII Others types 1 2 3
Caucasian
France In vitro: radiograph and sectioning 341 90.6% (309) 6.4% (22) 3% (10) 68.9% (235) 31.1% (106) 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		                         Geider et al. [4], 1989
Germany In vitro: examination 2369 99.3% (2352) 0.7% (17) 0%
(0)		                                 Schulze. [5], 1970
Poland In vitro: extraction and RCT 83       89.3% (74) 10.7% (9) 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		                         Rózyło et al. [6], 2008
USA In vitro: clearing 400 100% (400) 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 70% (280) 25% (100) 5% (20) 0%
(0)		 70% (280) 0%
(0)		 4% (16) 1.5% (6) 24% (96) 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 74% (296) 26% (104) 0%
(0)		 Vertucci [7], 1894
In vivo: radiographic examination 1002       81.8% (820) 18.2% (182) 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		                         Sabala et al. [8], 1994
In vitro: grinding and examination under magnification 50       86% (43) 14%
(7)		 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		                   90% (45) 10% (5) 0%
(0)		 Green [9], 1973
In vitro: sectioning 106       74% (78) 26% (28) 0%
(0)		 14%
(15)		 76% (80) 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 24% (26) 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 76% (80) 24% (26) 0%
(0)		 Baisden et al. [10], 1992
In vitro: sectioning 32 100% (32) 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 35.5% (12) 62.5% (20) 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		                         Barrett. [11], 1925
Extraction and radiograph 1287       66.9%
(861)		 32.7%
(421)		 0.4% (5) 0%
(0)		                   80.7% (1039) 19.3% (248) 0%
(0)		 Zillich and Dowson [12], 1973
In vitro: radiographs 156       95.5% (149) 4.5%
(7)		 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		                         Mueller et al. [13], 1933
In vivo: radiographic examination 400 94.5% (378) 5.5% (22) 0%
(0)		 86.3% (345) 13.7% (55) 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		                         Trope et al. [14], 1986
Subgroup Ethnic Incidence   6226 96.88%  
(3471) 		2.52%  
(61) 		0.6%  
(10) 		75.42% 
  (2586) 		23.84%  
(935) 		0.54%  
(25) 		1.4%  
(15) 		73%  
(360) 		  2%  
(16) 		12.75  
(32) 		12%  
(96) 		        80%  
(1490) 		20%  
(383) 		   
African
African American In vivo:
radiographic examination		 400 83.8% (335) 16.2% (65) 0%
(0)		 67.2% (269) 32.8% (131) 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		                         Zillich and Dowson [12], 1973
Senegalese In vivo:
radiographic examination		 412       81.3% (335) 15.1% (62) 3.6% (15) 0%
(0)		                         Mbaye et al. [15], 2008
Subgroup Ethnic Incidence   812 83.8%  
(335) 		16.2% 
(65) 		  74% 
(604) 		23.95% 
(193) 		1.8% 
(15) 		                         
Indian
India In vitro: SCT 100       80% (80) 11%
(11)		 0%
(0)		 2%
(2)		 80% (80) 9%
(9)		 3%
(3)		 2%
(2)		 4%
(4)		 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 2%
(2)		 94% (94) 6%
(6)		 0%
(0)		 Sandhya et al. [16], 2010
In vivo: radiographic examination 1000 95.9% (959) 3.9% (39) 0.2% (2)         75.4% (754) 1% (10) 0%
(0)		 20.8% (208) 2.4% (24) 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 0.4%
(4)		 0%
(0)		 76.4% (764) 23.2% (232) 0.4% (4) Iyer et al. [17], 2006
In vitro: clearing 100       72% (72) 27% (27) 0%
(0)		 1%
(1)		 72% (72) 6%
(6)		 3%
(3)		 10% (10) 8%
(8)		 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 82% (82) 18% (18) 0%
(0)		 Velmurugan and Sandhya [18], 2009
In vitro: clearing 40       50% (20) 50% (20) 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 50% (20) 5%
(2)		 5%
(2)		 25% (10) 12.5% (5) 2.5% (1) 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 82% (82) 18% (18) 0%
(0)		 Parekh et al. [19], 2011
In vitro: clearing 138 97.1% (134) 2.89% (4) 0%
(0)		 67% (92) 33% (46) 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 67.4% (92) 8%
(11)		 3.7% (5) 3.9% (5) 17.4% (24) 0.7% (1) 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 77.8% (107) 22.2% (31) 0%
(0)		 Jain and Bahuguna [20], 2011
In vitro: SCT 112 96.4% (108) 3.4% (4) 0%
(0)		 70.5%
(79)		 29.5%
(33)		 0%
(0)		 10.7%
(12)		 80%
(90)		 9%
(10)		 3%
(3)		 2%
(2)		 4%
(4)		 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 98% (110) 2%
(2)		 0%
(0)		 V. K. Sikri and P. Sikri [21], 1994
Subgroup Ethnic Incidence   1490 96.47%  
(1201) 		3.4%  
(47) 		0.07%  
(2) 		68%  
(343) 		30%  
(137) 		0% 3%  
(15) 		71%  
(1108) 		6%  
(48) 		3%  
(16) 		11%  
(237) 		8%  
(69) 		0.53%  
(2) 		  0.06%  
(4) 		0.33  
(2) 		85%  
(1239) 		15%  
(307) 		0.07%  
(4) 		 
Mongoloid
China In vitro: radiographs 100       64% (64) 34% (34) 2%
(2)		 0%
(0)		 78% (78) 6%`
(6)		 6%
(6)		 10% (10) 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 90% (90) 10% (10) 0%
(0)		 Walker [22], 1988
In vitro: radiograph and sectioning 82       54% (44) 46% (38) 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		                         Lu et al. [23], 2006
In vitro: Micro-CT 115       65.2% (75) 26.1% (40) 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 65.2% (75) 0%
(0)		 2.6% (3) 0%
(0)		 22.6% (26) 0%
(0)		 0.9% (1) 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 76.5% (88) 23.5% (27) 0%
(0)		 Liu et al. [24], 2013
In vivo: CBCT 178 98% (174) 2%
(4)		 0%
(0)		 87.1% (155) 11.2% (20) 0.6% (1) 1.1%
(2)		 86.8% (151) 0%
(0)		 1.7% (3) 0%
(0)		 9.8% (17) 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 0.6%
(1)		 0%
(0)		 89.6% (160) 9.8% (17) 0.6%
(1)		 Tian et al. [25], 2012
In vivo: CBCT 97       83.5% (81) 12.4% (12) 0%
(0)		 4.1%
(4)		 83.5% (81) 0%
(0)		 3.6% (3) 0%
(0)		 8.8% (8) 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 91.2% (88) 8.8% (9) 0%
(0)		 Liao et al. [26], 2011
In vivo: CBCT 440 99.5% (439) 0.5% (1) 0%
(0)		 75.2% (340) 21% (92) 0.7% (3) 1.1%
(5)		 76% (335) 3.4% (15) 2.7% (12) 6.6% (21) 9.3% (41) 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 0.7%
(3)		 0%
(0)		 83.4% (367) 15.9% (70) 0.7%
(3)		 Tian et al. [27], 2013
In vitro: Micro-CT 358             24%
(86)		                         Fan et al. [28], 2008
Japan In vitro: radiographs 516       86.2% (445) 13.8% (71) 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		                         Miyoshi et al. [29], 1977
In vitro: Staining 139       80.6% (112) 15.1% (21) 4.3% (6) 0%
(0)		                   80.6% (112) 19.4% (27) 0%
(0)		 Yoshioka et al. [30], 2004
Korea In vivo: CBCT 797 99.9% (796) 0.1% (1) 0%
(0)		                                 Park et al. [31], 2013
Subgroup Ethnic Incidence   2822 99%  
(1409) 		1%  
(6) 		  74.5%  
(1311) 		22.5%  
(328) 		.95%  
(12) 		3.7%  
(97) 		78%  
(720) 		0.85%  
(21) 		3%  
(27) 		3.32%  
(31) 		10.1%  
(92) 		  0.18%  
(1) 		0.74%  
(4) 		  85%  
(905) 		15%  
(160) 		0.65%  
(4) 		 
Middle East
Kuwait In vivo: radiograph of RCT teeth 20 85.0% (17) 15% (3) 0%
(0)		 60%
(12)		 40%
(8)		 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		                   60% (12) 40% (8) 0%
(0)		 Zaatar et al. [32], 1997
Jordan In vitro: clearing 500 97% (485) 3% (15) 0%
(0)		 58.2% (291) 39.8% (195) 2.6% (13) 0%
(0)		 58.2% (251) 4.8%
(24)		 1.4%
(7)		 14.4% (72) 16.8% (84) 0.8%
(4)		 1%
(5)		 0%
(0)		 2.6%
(5)		       Awawdeh and Al-Qudah [33], 2008
Iran In vitro: sectioning 217 100% (217) 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 88.47% (192) 11.53%
(25)		 0%
(0)		 1.4%
(3)		 90%
(195)		 1.8% (4) 3.2%
(7)		 0.9% (2) 4.1% (9) 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 93.8%
(203)		 5%
(11)		 1.2%
(3)		 Khedmat et al. [34], 2010
In vitro: clearing 163 98% (160) 2% (3) 0%
(0)		 70.6% (115) 27.8% (45) 1.2%
(2)		 2.4%
(4)		 70.6% (113) 1.9%
(3)		 3.8%
(6)		 3.8%
(6)		 16.9% (27) 1.2%
(2)		 0.6%
(1)		 0%
(0)		 1.2%
(2)		 77.5%
(126)		 22.5%
(37)		 0%
(0)		 Rahimi et al. [35], 2007
Turkey In vitro: clearing 100 100% (100) 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 64% (64) 30% (30) 5%
(6)		 0%
(0)		                   75% (75) 25% (25) 0%
(0)		 Çalişkan et al. [36], 1995
In vitro: clearing 200       60.5% (121) 39.5% (69) 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 60.6% (121) 18.5% (37) 10.5% (21) 7% (14) 2.5% (5) 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 1%
(2)		 0%
(0)		 89.5% (179) 9.5% (19) 1%
(2)		 Sert and Bayirli [37], 2004
Subgroup Ethnic Incidence   1200 96%  
(979) 		6.67%  
(21) 		  67%  
(795) 		31%  
(372) 		1.46%  
(21) 		0.63%  
(7) 		69.85%  
(680) 		6.75%  
(68) 		4.73%  
(41) 		6.53%  
(94) 		9.85%  
(125) 		0.5%  
(6) 		0.4%  
(6) 		0.25%  
(2) 		0.95%  
(7) 		79%  
(595) 		20%  
(100) 		0.44%  
(5) 		 
Hispanic
Mexico In vitro: radiograph 202       79.3% (140) 25.8% (62) 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		                   74.2% (150) 25.8 (52) 0%
(0)		 Pineda and Kuttler [38], 1972
Total no of teeth   12752 7395 200 12 6070 2027 73 181 2868 137 100 394 382 8 7 10 9 4349 1002 13  
Overall Incidence (%]     97.21  
(%) 		2.63  
(%) 		0.16  
(%) 		73.55  
(%) 		23.55  
(%) 		0.91  
(%) 		2  
(%) 		72.6  
(%) 		3.73  
(%) 		2.72  
(%) 		10.72  
(%) 		10.4  
(%) 		0.22  
(%) 		0.19  
(%) 		0.27  
(%) 		0.24  
(%) 		81.08  
(%) 		18.68  
(%) 		0.24  
(%) 		 
Open in a new tab

Table 2.

Summary of the incidences of documented ethnic and population variations in the anatomy of mandibular second premolars.

Geographic
and ethnic
distribution		 Materials
and
methods		 No. of teeth in the study (n) Root anatomy Root canal anatomy Root canal pattern (Vertucci)
 Apical foramina References
1
root		 2 roots >2 roots 1 canal 2 canals >2 canals C-shaped Type I Type II Type III Type IV Type V Type VI Type VII Type VIII Others types 1 2 3
Caucasian
France In vitro: radiograph and sectioning 328 97.6% (320) 2.4% (8) 0%
(0)		 86.6% (284) 13.4% (44)                             Geider et al. [4], 1989
Germany In vitro: analysis of extracted teeth 2089 99.85% (2086) 0.05% (1) 0.1% (2)                                 Visser [41], 1948
Poland In vitro: extraction and RCT 56       68.2% (38) 31.8% (18) 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		                         Rózyło et al. [6], 2008
U.S.A In vitro: clearing 400 100% (400) 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 97.5% (390) 2.5% (10) 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 97.5% (390) 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 2.5% (10) 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 97.5% (390) 2.5% (10) 0%
(0)		 Vertucci [7], 1984
In vitro: sectioning 32 100% (32) 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 65.6% (21) 34.4% (11)                             Barrett [11], 1925
In vitro: extraction and radiograph 906 96.6% (902) 0%
(0)		 3.4% (4) 87.5% (792) 12.5  
(112)		 0.4% (2) 0%
(0)		                         Zillich and Dowson [12], 1973
In vitro: grinding and examination under magnification 50       92% (46) 8%
(4)		 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		                   96% (48) 4% (2) 0%
(0)		 Green [9], 1973
Subgroup ethnic incidence   3861 98.81% 0.49% 0.7% 82.9% 17.1% 0.07% 0% 97.5%       2.5%         96.75% 3.25%    
African
Senegalese In vivo: radiographic examination 408       86% (351) 12% (49) 2%
(8)		 0%
(0)		                         Mbaye et al. [15], 2008
Indian
India In vitro: clearing 40       80% (32) 20%
(8)		 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 80% (32) 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 2.5% (1) 17.5% (7) 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 80% (32) 20% (8) 0%
(0)		 Parekh et al. [19], 2011
In vitro: SCT 96 97.9% (94) 2.1% (2) 0%
(0)		 87% (83) 13.5% (13) 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 80% (78) 9%
(9)		 3%
(3)		 2%
(2)		 4%
(4)		 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 94% (90) 6%
(6)		 0%
(0)		 V. K. Sikri and P. Sikri [21], 1994
Subgroup ethnic incidence   136 97.9% 2.1% 0% 83.5% 16.75% 0% 0% 80% 4.5% 1.5% 2.25% 10.75%         87% 13%    
Mongoloid
China In vivo: CBCT 178 100% (178) 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 97.2% (173) 2.2%
(4)		 0%
(0)		 0.6%
(1)		 97.2% (173) 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 0.5% (1) 1.69% (3) 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 0.5%
(1)		       Tian et al. [25], 2012
Japan In vitro: radiograph 40       97.9% (39) 2.1%
(1)		 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		                         Miyoshi et al. [29], 1977
Korea CBCT 789 99.4% (784) 0.6% (5) 0%
(0)		                                 Park et al. [31], 2013
Subgroup ethnic incidence   1007 99.7% 0.3% 0% 97.5% 2.15% 0% 0.3% 97.2%     0.5% 1.69%       0.5%      
Middle east
Kuwait In vitro: radiograph of RCT teeth 64 95.6% (61) 4.4% (3) 0%
(0)		 95.3% (61) 4.7%
(3)		 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		                   95.3% (61) 4.7% (3) 0%
(0)		 Zaatar et al. [32], 1997
Jordan In vitro: clearing 400 97.2% (389) 2.8% (11) 0%
(0)		 72% (288) 27.5% (110) 0.5% (2) 0%
(0)		 78% (288) 3.8% (15) 0.1% (4) 7.5% (30) 15.3% (61) 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 0.5%
(2)		 74.2% (337) 15.8% (63) 0%
(0)		 Awawdeh and Al-Qudah [33], 2008
Iran In vitro: clearing 103 100% (103) 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 80.5% (83) 17.5% (18) 0%
(0)		 2%
(2)		 76.3% (76) 7.9% (9) 9.9% (11) 5.9% (7) 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 94.1% (97) 5.9% (6) 0%
(0)		 Rahimi et al. [35], 2007
In vitro: clearing and sectioning 80       88.8% (71) 11.2% (9) 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 91.2% (73) 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 97.5% (78) 2.5% (2) 0%
(0)		 Hasheminia and Hashemi [39], 2005
In vitro: clearing 137       94.2% (129) 5.8%
(8)		 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		                   75.9% (104) 24.1% (33) 0%
(0)		 Rahimi et al. [40], 2009
Turkey In vitro: clearing 100 100% (100) 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 93.6% (94) 6.4%
(6)		 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 93.6% (94) 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 6.4% (6) 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 93.6% (94) 6.4% (6) 0%
(0)		 Çalişkan et al. [36], 1995
In vitro: clearing 200 100% (200) 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 71% (142) 29% (58) 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 71% (142) 7% (14) 3.5% (7) 9% (18) 7%
(14)		 1.5% (3) 1%
(2)		 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		 81.5% (163) 18.5% (37) 0%
(0)		 Sert and Bayirli [37], 2004
Subgroup ethnic incidence   1084 98.56% 1.44% 0% 85.06% 14.59% 0.07% 0.29% 82.02% 3.74% 2.7% 4.48% 5.74% 0.3% 0.2%   0.1% 87.44% 11.13%    
Hispanic
Mexico In vitro: radiographs 250       98.8% (247) 1.2%
(3)		 0%
(0)		 0%
(0)		                   98.8% (247) 1.2% (3) 0%
(0)		 Pineda and Kuttler [38], 1972
Total no of teeth   6746 5649 34 6 3364 489 12 3 1346 46 46 58 105 3 2 0 3 1741 179 0  
Overall incidence     99.28% 0.61 0.01% 86.9% 12.64% 0.31% 0.08% 83.65% 2.86% 2.86% 3.6% 6.52% 0.18% 0.12% 0% 0.18% 90.68% 9.32% 0%  
Open in a new tab

3.1. Radicular Anatomy with Ethnic and Demographic Patterns

In most instances, mandibular first premolars were found to have one root (97.21%). However, only 73.55% of these single rooted teeth contained a single canal. Thus, although the incidence of two roots was low (2.63%), about 23.55% teeth had two canals. Higher incidences of two roots were noted in the African-American population (16.2%) [14] and a Kuwaiti population (15%) [32]. Three or more rooted forms were reported in only 3% French [4] and 0.2% Indian [17] populations, respectively.

A higher incidence of two canals in mandibular first premolars was reported in several populations, upto 50% in Indian populations [16, 18–21] and approximately 40% in Middle Eastern populations from Kuwait [32], Jordan [33], and Turkey [36, 37]. While the Hispanic population [38] in Mexico also showed an incidence of 30.7%, the Chinese [22–27] and Caucasian [4, 6–14] populations had a variable incidence of two canals in about 10.7–36%. The incidence of three or more canals in mandibular first premolars was considerably lower (0–5%) [7, 12, 15, 22, 25, 27, 30, 33, 35, 36], with no such canal systems noted in Indian and Hispanic populations.

On the other hand, mandibular second bicuspids presented with a higher incidence of one root (99.28%) and one canal (86.9%). Overall, a second root was present in about 0.0–4.4% (average 0.61%) of teeth. In different studies, Caucasians [4, 6, 7, 9, 11, 12] and Turkish [36, 37] populations presented with a varied incidence of a second canal ranging from 2.5 to 34.4% and 6.4 to 29%, respectively. Second premolars presented with a second canal in Indian (13.5–20%) [19, 21], Iranian (5.8–17.5%) [35, 39, 40], or Jordanian (22.8%) [33] populations. However, Mongoloid [25, 29] and Hispanic [38] populations presented a much lower incidence of a second canal, 2% and 1.2%, respectively. Three or more canals in mandibular second premolars were scarcely reported (0–2%) [12, 15, 33].

C-shaped canal anatomy has been mainly documented in mandibular first bicuspids. Studies have reported a high incidence of C-shaped canals in Chinese populations ranging from 18 to 24% [23, 28], while other Chinese studies [25–27] have reported a lower incidence of 0–4–1.1%. In an Indian population, V. K. Sikri and P. Sikri [21] reported 10% first premolars exhibiting C-shaped canals while Sandhya et al. [16] reported the variation in 2% teeth in a southern Indian population. C-shaped canals were found to be of low incidence in second bicuspids, with only 0.6% and 2% incidence reported, respectively, in a Chinese [25] and an Iranian [35] study.

Lu et al. [23] coined the term “circumferential canals,” for an unusual aberration found in 6% of mandibular first premolars. A circumferential canal was described as a single canal in the center with 3 or 4 canals at the circumference when viewed in cross-section, that is, a single canal splitting into several canals (apical delta) at apical 3 mm from sagital view. The teeth had a single oval canal or two canals in an oval-shaped root while the C-shaped morphology was found in the apical 3 mm and/or 6 mm level cross-sections.

In both premolars, single canals were most likely to be an independent canal from orifice to apical foramen (Type I). However, in first premolar, a significant number of bifid canals fused prior to exit (Type II) in Indian and Turkish populations (9–18%) [16–21, 37]. Type IV pattern was more prevalent than Type V pattern in most population groups. However, Type V pattern (9–22%) was much higher than Type IV patterns (0–10%) in Mongoloids pointing to a higher prevalence of a singular canal bifurcating along its length, somewhat similar to the description of the above-mentioned circumferential canals. In second premolars, the Type V pattern was more prevalent than Type IV in all population groups, with significantly higher prevalence of upto 15–17% in Indian and Jordanian. A single apical foramen was present in 81% first premolars and 90% second premolars. The mandibular first premolar was more prone to bifurcation of canals (23–30%) terminating in multiple apical foramina (15–20%).

Based on the statistical analysis performed, a significant variation in the number of roots, root canals, and apical foramen was observed between all the ethnicities, in both mandibular bicuspids. Thus, based on this analysis, the number of roots, root canals, and apical foramen were significantly different in Caucasian, Indian, Mongoloid, and Middle Eastern populations. Additionally, there was also a significant difference in the root canal configurations of these population groups. However, in case of comparing for anatomic variations within populations of the same ethnicity, statistics could be performed only when sufficient data allowed for statistical analysis. The numbers of roots and root canals in first and second premolars were statistically significantly different in French, German, Polish, and the United States populations of Caucasians, as well as among the first premolars of Middle Eastern populations, Turkey, Jordan, Kuwait, and Iran. However, no such statistical significance was observed between Chinese and Korean second premolars.

Six ex vivo studies have reported the presence of a deep external mesial invagination (mesial invagination) along the root surface of mandibular premolars [16, 18, 20, 24, 33, 42] (Table 3). Sandhya et al. [16] assessed the root dentin thickness at the depth of the mesial invagination in mandibular first premolars and reported the average root thickness at the cervical, middle, and apical thirds to be 0.8, 0.78, and 0.3 mm, respectively. All C-shaped configuration premolars could also present an associated groove or concavity on the proximal lingual area of the middle root that would not always extend to the root apex. Some grooves presented as deep, folding grooves while others were not so distinguished or were just shallow concavities [23].

Table 3.

Summary of exvivo studies reporting a deep mesial radicular invagination in mandibular premolars.

Population Incidence Tooth type References
India 14% 1st premolar Velmurugan and Sandhya [18], 2009
14% 1st premolar Sandhya et al. [16], 2010
15.21% 1st premolar Jain and Bahuguna [20], 2011
China 27.8% 1st premolar Liu et al. [24], 2013
Jordan 17.6% 1st premolar Awawdeh and Al-Qudah [33], 2008
13.5% 2nd premolar
Austria 15% 1st premolar Robinson et al. [42], 2002
Open in a new tab

3.2. Gender Predilection

There is little documentation correlating the influence of gender on root/canal anatomy and its variations. Of the reported studies, females had a higher likelihood of two or more roots or canals in mandibular first premolars, whereas men exhibited multiple canals much more frequently than females in mandibular second premolars [17, 37, 43]. Others have reported no significant difference in root configuration between females and males [29].

3.3. Case Reports

In addition to these numerous population studies, thirty-six case reports have also documented anatomic variations. The anatomic aberrations reported as endodontic case reports in the literature include mandibular first premolars with 2 or 3 canals in 1 root or 2 roots; 3 roots and 3 canals; and 4 canals in 4 roots (Table 4) [44–59]. Mandibular second premolars have shown variations that include 2, 3, 4, and 5 canals in 1 root; 2, 3, and 4 canals in 2 roots; 3 roots and 3 or 4 canals; (Table 5) [46, 49, 53–55, 60–80].

Table 4.

Table enlisting documented case reports of mandibular first premolars with multiplicity of roots or root canals in teeth presenting.

Number of roots Root canal anatomy Diagnostic method Country Reference
1 root 2 canals R/G USA England et al. [44], 1991
2 canals R/G India Shenoy et al. [45], 2013
3 canals R/G Jamaica Nallapati [46], 2005
3 canals R/G Brazil De Almeida-Gomes et al. [47], 2006
2 roots 2 canals R/G India Kararia et al. [48], 2012
3 canals R/G India Poorni et al. [49] 2010
3 canals R/G India Moayedi and Lata [50], 2004
N/A R/G USA Milano et al. [51], 2002
3 roots 3 canals R/G India Kakkar and Singh [52], 2012
3 canals R/G China Chan et al. [53], 1992
3 canals Extraction USA Fischer and Evans [54], 1992
3 canals Micro CT after extraction Britain Cleghorn et al. [55], 2008
N/A 3 canals R/G Germany Hu¨lsmann [56], 1990
N/A 3 canals R/G Australia Yang [57], 1994
4 roots 4 canals R/G India Vaghela and Sinha [58], 2013
— 4 canals R/G China Du et al. [59], 2013
Open in a new tab

N/A: not available, R/G: radiograph, and micro-CT: microcomputed tomography.

Table 5.

Table summarizing case reports of anatomical variations of roots and root canals in mandibular second premolars.

Number of roots Root canal anatomy Diagnostic mode Country Reference
1 root 3 canals R/G USA Nallapati [46], 2005
3 canals R/G India N. Kararia and V. Kararia [60], 2013
4 canals R/G Isreal Holtzman [61], 1998
4 canals R/G USA Wong [62], 1991
5 canals R/G Argentina Macri and Zmener [63], 2000
C-shaped Micro-CT after extraction Britain Cleghorn et al. [55], 2008
2 roots 2 canals R/G India Goswami et al. [64], 1997
2 canals R/G India Prakash et al. [65], 2008
3 canals R/G China Chan et al. [53], 1992
3 canals R/G Germany Rödig and Hülsmann [66], 2003
3 canals R/G Belgium De Moor and Calberson. [67], 2005
3 canals R/G Iran Lotfi et al. [68], 2008
3 canals R/G Brazil Soares et al. [69], 2009
3 canals R/G Iran Shokouhinejad [70], 2009
3 canals R/G India Aguiar et al. [71], 2010
3 canals R/G India Poorni et al. [49], 2010
4 canals R/G USA Bram and Fleisher [72], 1991
4 canals R/G Saudi Arabia Al-Fouzan [73], 2001
4 canals R/G United Kingdom Rhodes [74], 2001
4 canals R/G Greece Tzanetakis et al. [75], 2007
3 canals Extraction USA Fischer and Evans [54], 1992
3 canals R/G Iran Shalavi et al. [76], 2012
3 canals CBCT Iran Mokhtari et al. [77], 2013
4 canals Extraction USA Shapira and Delivanis [78], 1982
4 roots
 4 canals SCT Indian Sachdeva et al. [79], 2008
4 canals R/G Greece Farmakis [80], 2008
Open in a new tab

CBCT: cone beam computed tomography, Micro-CT: microcomputed tomography, SCT: spiral computed tomography, and R/G: radiograph.

3.4. Anatomic Developmental Anomalies

Adding to the complexity of the mandibular premolars are various developmental anomalies (Table 6) [77, 81–90]. In 1997, Hartup [81] reported a Type III dens invaginatus and a bifurcated root of the mandibular first premolar. Tavano et al. [83] reported a dens invaginatus wherein the clinical crown was larger than the contralateral first premolar. No case reports of dens invaginatus in the mandibular second premolar have been reported (Table 6). Conversely, dens evaginatus most frequently affected mandibular second premolars and was more often reported in Mongoloid people [88].

Table 6.

Summary of various developmental anomalies that have been reported in mandibular premolars.

Mandibular premolar Developmental anomalies Root/root canal anatomy Diagnostic mode Reference
1st premolar Dens invaginatus 2 roots R/G Hartup [81], 1997
Dens invaginatus N/A R/G Bramante et al. [82], 1993
Dens invaginatus N/A R/G Tavano et al. [83], 1994
Gemination 3 canals R/G Aryanpour et al. [84], 2002
Dens invaginatus 1 root R/G Er et al. [85], 2007
Dens invaginatus (bilateral) N/A R/G Canger et al. [86], 2009
2nd premolar Dens evaginatus N/A R/G Koh et al. [87], 2001
Fusion with mandibular first molar 5 canals R/G Tsesis et al. [88], 2003
Fusion with supernumerary tooth N/A Clinical Sathish Muthukumar et al. [89],
2012
Taurodontism 3 canal CBCT Mokhtari et al. [77], 2013
Taurodontism 5 canals R/G Demiryürek et al. [90], 2013
Open in a new tab

CBCT: cone beam computed tomography, R/G: radiograph, and N/A: not available.

Aryanpour et al. [84] reported root canal and periodontal treatment of a geminated mandibular first premolar, that is, two distinct crowns with united roots, with three canals. Kusaik et al. [91] reported the root morphology of mandibular premolars in female Polish patients with Turners syndrome, based on orthopantomogram X-ray images. They reported two-rooted mandibular teeth in 31–34% first premolars and 31–39% second premolars, which is much higher than that reported in general populations (<5%).

4. Discussion

Several factors contribute to variations found in the root and root canals that include ethnicity and gender. Scott and Turner [92], in their anthropological review, described the accessory root of first mandibular premolars as Tome's root, which showed a high incidence of greater than 25% in ethnic Australians and sub-Sahara African populations. Contrastingly, American Arctic, New Guinea, Jomon, and Western Eurasian populations had a lower incidence of the accessory root (0 to 10%). Such anthropological data could provide valuable information regarding the likelihood of an additional root in mandibular premolars of specific ethnic populations. Thus, the role of genetics should also not be underestimated in determining anatomic variations of human teeth.

Numerous methods have been used for studying root canal anatomy, including replication techniques [93], ground sections [94], clearing techniques [95], and radiography [96]. Advanced modes of radiographic imaging and analysis have allowed for in-depth knowledge of pulp space anatomy in three dimensions and allowed for identification of rare aberrations. These methods include spiral computed tomography (SCT) [16, 21], micro-computed tomography (micro CT) [24, 28, 97], and cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) [25–27]. Study design differences and the various origins of the investigated teeth could account for the highly variable results.

Ex vivo anatomic investigations, although the most widely used, inherently have certain shortcomings. It involves evaluation of extracted teeth that are frequently difficult to collect in sufficient numbers along with known specifics like age, gender, and so forth. Furthermore, most extracted teeth collected are severely damaged leading to difficulties in determining accurately the tooth notation. An additional negative impact if only sound teeth are selected is selection bias [25, 30]. Additionally, not all anatomic studies assessing mandibular premolars have reported the root and root canal configuration. Either one of these has been described with most studies discussing the root canal configuration (Tables 1 and 2). It would be of much more analytic and scientific value if the maximum data could be presented from the analyzed teeth, especially when the methodology leads to destruction of the samples. Thus, although a large number of mandibular premolars have been analyzed in anatomic studies, maximum extrapolation is lacking. CBCT imaging by means of its minimal radiation exposure, sample preservation, accuracy, and three-dimensional data acquisition of multiple teeth, could overcome the shortfalls of ex vivo methods and offer maximum information without solely depending on analysis of extracted teeth.

Differences in the method of analysis and data presentation could also contribute to an inaccurate perception of the incidence of variable anatomy. Data presented by number of patients instead of by number of teeth generally results in higher frequencies of the reported anomaly [14]. Also, the sample size studied in relation to the total sample of the population plays an important role in the overall ratio of variations. For instance, the only study analyzing the anatomy of a Kuwaiti population assessed only 20 mandibular first premolars of which 15% were two-rooted teeth and 40% contained two canals. Although these values are above the general weighted average or incidence among neighboring population groups, these findings may not reliably signify the accurate incidence of tooth anatomy within the population. Thus, studies of larger sample groups and streamlining data in the form of number of teeth could enhance comparison and also give a more dependable picture of the prevalent anatomy.

An interesting pattern that can be observed is that case reports of the second premolar by far outnumber those of the first premolar, especially in reported variations. This is contrary to the findings of epidemiologic studies, which reported an increased possibility of anatomic variation in mandibular first premolars. Despite these contrasting findings, anatomic studies serve as an indicator of the possible anatomic variations in analyzed population groups and should not be considered as the lone guiding principle. Wider anatomic variations are certainly possible in any tooth, as also in teeth that are less likely to show aberrations. On the other hand, case reports could be misleading to the clinician with regard to the incidence of the documented aberrations; however, their didactic value is of extreme importance. It allows the clinician to be in the best position to detect, discern, and diagnose various previously documented in vivo anatomic variations.

Pucci and Reig [98], in their monumental work Conductos Radiculares, concluded that the mandibular second premolar had two canals and two foramina 11.5% of the time, whereas the mandibular first premolar had branching canals, apical bifurcations, and trifurcations 26.5% of the time. Cleghorn et al. [99, 100], in a review of mandibular first and second premolars, presented findings regarding the number of roots, number of canals, and apical morphology. They reported that approximately 98% of mandibular first premolars were single-rooted with a single canal in 75.8% of the teeth. In cases of second premolars, almost all of the teeth in the anatomic studies were single-rooted (99.6%) with a single canal (91.0%). Comparatively, the findings of the present systematic review are more or less in agreement with these observations of Pucci and Reig [98] and Cleghorn et al. [99, 100].

The data analyzed in this systematic review is secondary data that is sourced from numerous previously published studies. Such secondary data is prone to drawbacks or biases that are inherent in the original data which could ultimately reflect in the results of this study as well. For instance, the method of analysis or the minimal number of teeth analyzed in a particular study. However, the intention was to provide the dental and endodontic fraternity, an interpretation of the vast data on mandibular premolars with a possibility of correlation to geographical origin and ethnicity that was not previously available.

The descriptions of the frequently occurring root and canal forms of permanent teeth are based largely on studies conducted in Europe and North America and relate to teeth of predominantly Caucasoid origin [1, 3]. The descriptions may not be wholly applicable to teeth of non-Caucasoid origin. The present systemic review provides additional and up-to-date information regarding the canal configuration of premolars and their apical exit patterns which allows for further comparison among different population groups around the globe. However, a very slight trend of more varied anatomy, that is, two or more roots or canals, could be seen in recent anatomic studies using modern imaging techniques, in as yet lesser analyzed population groups. Future documentation of root and canal anatomy in previously lesser studied geographical populations could show a trend of discrepancies between previously established weighted averages. However, it would be more appropriate and accurate to base successive comparisons of anatomic averages on ethnicities and demography's, as against the general norm of overall weighted averages.

5. Conclusions

  1. The mandibular first premolar was more prone to bifurcation of canals (23–30%) terminating in multiple apical foramina (15–20%), as compared to second premolars.

  2. The C-shaped canal pattern was most prevalent in first premolars of Chinese populations (upto 24%).

  3. In second premolars, Caucasian, Indian, and Middle Eastern populations showed a higher prevalence of multiple canals (14–17%).

  4. Type I canal configuration was most prevalent in both first (72.6%) and second premolars (83.65%).

  5. A deep mesial radicular invagination was a common finding in multiple population groups in first premolars (13–27%).

  6. Dens invaginatus was the most common developmental anomaly in first premolars.

  7. There exists an association between ethnicity and root, root canal morphology across population groups in first and second premolars.

Recent imaging techniques and evaluation of wider populations have given a better insight regarding mandibular premolar anatomy and their inherent variations. Certain population and geographic groups have little or no data regarding mandibular premolar morphology, especially in South American, African, Australasian, and South East Asian populations. Although the studies that have been covered under this review did provide relevant information regarding root and root canal anatomy, other important data relating to apical anatomy, relationship of the anatomic apex with the apical foramen, precise location of bifurcations when present, mesiodistal width of roots, areas along the root that show narrowing or thinning, canal isthmuses, canal curvature, and so forth needs further evaluation and documentation in future research. Racial differences and its influence on pulp space anatomy should always be kept in mind.

Supplementary Material

The data extrapolated through the statistics is attached as supplementary file.

Click here for additional data file. (25.2KB, xlsx)

Conflict of Interests

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests regarding the publication of this paper.

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Dr. Basil Joy (Postgraduate Student, Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics) and Dr. Asha K Bava (Intern), Mar Baselios Dental College, Kerala, India, for the help received in preparing this paper.

References

  • 1.D'Souza R. Development of the pulpodentinal complex. In: Hargreaves K, editor. Seltzer and Bender's Dental Pulp. Chicago, Ill, USA: Quintessence Books; 2002. [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Vertucci FJ. Root canal morphology and its relationship to endodontic procedures. Endodontic Topics. 2005;10:3–29. [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Butler PM. Dental merism and tooth development. Journal of Dental Research. 1967;46(5):845–850. doi: 10.1177/00220345670460053801. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Geider P, Perrin C, Fontaine M. Endodontic anatomy of lower premolars–apropos of 669 cases. Journal d'Odontologie Conservatrice. 1989;(10):11–15. (Fre). [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Schulze C. Developmental abnormalities of teeth and jaws. In: Gorlin R, Goldman H, editors. Thoma's Oral Pathology. 6th edition. St. Louis, Mo, USA: CV Mosby; 1970. pp. 106–107. [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Rózyło TK, Miazek M, Rózyło-Kalinowska I, Burdan F. Morphology of root canals in adult premolar teeth. Folia Morphologica. 2008;67(4):280–285. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Vertucci FJ. Root canal anatomy of the human permanent teeth. Oral Surgery Oral Medicine and Oral Pathology. 1984;58(5):589–599. doi: 10.1016/0030-4220(84)90085-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Sabala CL, Benenati FW, Neas BR. Bilateral root or root canal aberrations in a dental school patient population. Journal of Endodontics. 1994;20(1):38–42. doi: 10.1016/s0099-2399(06)80025-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Green D. Double canals in single roots. Oral Surgery Oral Medicine and Oral Pathology. 1973;35(5):689–696. doi: 10.1016/0030-4220(73)90037-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Baisden MK, Kulild JC, Weller RN. Root canal configuration of the mandibular first premolar. Journal of Endodontics. 1992;18(10):505–508. doi: 10.1016/S0099-2399(06)81352-X. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Barrett M. The internal anatomy of the teeth with special reference to the pulp and its branches. Dental Cosmos. 1925;67:581–592. [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Zillich R, Dowson J. Root canal morphology of mandibular first and second premolars. Oral Surgery Oral Medicine and Oral Pathology. 1973;36(5):738–744. doi: 10.1016/0030-4220(73)90147-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Mueller A. Anatomy of the root canals of the incisors, cuspids and bicuspids of the permanent teeth. The Journal of the American Dental Association. 1933;20:1361–1386. [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Trope M, Elfenbein L, Tronstad L. Mandibular premolars with more than one root canal in different race groups. Journal of Endodontics. 1986;12(8):343–345. doi: 10.1016/S0099-2399(86)80035-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Mbaye M, Touré B, Kane AW, Leye F, Bane K, Boucher Y. Radiographic study of the canal anatomy of mandibular premolars in a Senegalese population. Dakar Médical. 2008;53(3):267–271. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Sandhya R, Velmurugan N, Kandaswamy D. Assessment of root canal morphology of mandibular first premolars in the Indian population using spiral computed tomography: an in vitro study. Indian Journal of Dental Research. 2010;21(2):169–173. doi: 10.4103/0970-9290.66626. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Iyer V, Indira R, Ramachandran S, Srinivasan M. Anatomical variations of mandibular premolars in Chennai population. Indian Journal of Dental Research. 2006;17(1):7–10. doi: 10.4103/0970-9290.29898. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Velmurugan N, Sandhya R. Root canal morphology of mandibular first premolars in an Indian population: a laboratory study. International Endodontic Journal. 2009;42(1):54–58. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2008.01494.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Parekh V, Shah N, Joshi H. Root canal morphology and variations of mandibular premolars by clearing technique: an in vitro study. Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice. 2011;12(4):318–321. doi: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-1052. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Jain A, Bahuguna R. Root canal morphology of mandibular first premolar in a Gujarati population-an in vitro study. Dental Research Journal. 2011;8:118–122. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Sikri VK, Sikri P. Mandibular premolars: aberrations in pulp space morphology. Indian Journal of Dental Research. 1994;5(1):9–14. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Walker RT. Root canal anatomy of mandibular first premolars in a southern Chinese population. Endodontics & dental traumatology. 1988;4(5):226–228. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-9657.1988.tb00326.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Lu T-Y, Yang S-F, Pai S-F. Complicated root canal morphology of mandibular first premolar in a Chinese population using the cross section method. Journal of Endodontics. 2006;32(10):932–936. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2006.04.008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Liu N, Li X, Liu N, et al. A micro-computed tomography study of the root canal morphology of the mandibular first premolar in a population from southwestern China. Clinical Oral Investigations. 2013;17:999–1007. doi: 10.1007/s00784-012-0778-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Tian Y-Y, Guo B, Zhang R, et al. Root and canal morphology of maxillary first premolars in a Chinese subpopulation evaluated using cone-beam computed tomography. International Endodontic Journal. 2012;45(11):996–1003. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2012.02059.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Liao Q, Han JL, Xu X. Analysis of canal morphology of mandibular first premolar. Shanghai Kou Qiang Yi Xue. 2011;20:517–521. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Tian Y-Y, Guo B, Zhang R, et al. Root and canal morphology of maxillary first premolars in a Chinese subpopulation evaluated using cone-beam computed tomography. International Endodontic Journal. 2013;39:435–438. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2012.02059.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Fan B, Yang J, Gutmann JL, Fan M. Root canal systems in mandibular first premolars with C-shaped root configurations. Part I: microcomputed tomography mapping of the radicular groove and associated root canal cross-sections. Journal of Endodontics. 2008;34(11):1337–1341. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2008.08.006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Miyoshi S, Fujiwara J, Tsuji YNakata T, Yamamoto K. Bifurcated root canals and crown diameter. Journal of Dental Research. 1977;56(11):p. 1425. doi: 10.1177/00220345770560112901. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Yoshioka T, Villegas JC, Kobayashi C, Suda H. Radiographic evaluation of root canal multiplicity in mandibular first premolars. Journal of Endodontics. 2004;30(2):73–74. doi: 10.1097/00004770-200402000-00002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Park JB, Kim N, Park S, Kim Y, Ko Y. Evaluation of root anatomy of permanent mandibular premolars and molars in a Korean population with cone-beam computed tomography. European Journal of Dentistry. 2013;7:94–101. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Zaatar EI, Al-Kandari AM, Alhomaidah S, Al-Yasin IM. Frequency of endodontic treatment in Kuwait: radiographic evaluation of 846 endodontically treated teeth. Journal of Endodontics. 1997;23(7):453–456. doi: 10.1016/s0099-2399(97)80302-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Awawdeh LA, Al-Qudah AA. Root form and canal morphology of mandibular premolars in a Jordanian population. International Endodontic Journal. 2008;41(3):240–248. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2007.01348.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Khedmat S, Assadian H, Saravani AA. Root canal morphology of the mandibular first premolars in an Iranian population using cross-sections and radiography. Journal of Endodontics. 2010;36(2):214–217. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2009.10.002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Rahimi S, Shahi S, Yavari HR, Manafi H, Eskandarzadeh N. Root canal configuration of mandibular first and second premolars in an Iranian population. Journal of Dental Research, Dental Clinics, Dental Prospects. 2007;1:59–64. doi: 10.5681/joddd.2007.010. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Çalişkan MK, Pehlivan Y, Sepetçioğlu F, Türkün M, Tuncer SŞ. Root canal morphology of human permanent teeth in a Turkish population. Journal of Endodontics. 1995;21(4):200–204. doi: 10.1016/S0099-2399(06)80566-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Sert S, Bayirli GS. Evaluation of the root canal configurations of the mandibular and maxillary permanent teeth by gender in the Turkish population. Journal of Endodontics. 2004;30(6):391–398. doi: 10.1097/00004770-200406000-00004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Pineda F, Kuttler Y. Mesiodistal and buccolingual roentgenographic investigation of 7,275 root canals. Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology. 1972;33(1):101–110. doi: 10.1016/0030-4220(72)90214-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Hasheminia M, Hashemi A. Frequency of canal configuration in maxillary first premolar and mandibular second premolars. Journal of Isfahan Dental School. 2005;1:59–64. [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Rahimi S, Shahi S, Yavari HR, Reyhani MF, Ebrahimi ME, Rajabi E. A stereomicroscopy study of root apices of human maxillary central incisors and mandibular second premolars in an Iranian population. Journal of Oral Science. 2009;51(3):411–415. doi: 10.2334/josnusd.51.411. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Visser J. Beitrag zur Kenntnis der menschlichen Zahnwurzelformen [medical dissertation] Zurich, Switzerland: Universitat Zurich; 1948. [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Robinson S, Czerny C, Gahleitner A, Bernhart T, Kainberger FM. Dental CT evaluation of mandibular first premolar root configurations and canal variations. Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology, Oral Radiology, and Endodontics. 2002;93(3):328–332. doi: 10.1067/moe.2002.120055. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Serman NJ, Hasselgren G. The radiographic incidence of multiple roots and canals in human mandibular premolars. International Endodontic Journal. 1992;25(5):234–237. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.1992.tb01155.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.England MC, Jr., Hartwell GR, Lance JR. Detection and treatment of multiple canals in mandibular premolars. Journal of Endodontics. 1991;17(4):174–178. doi: 10.1016/S0099-2399(06)82012-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Shenoy A, Bolla N, Vemuri S, Kurian J. Endodontic retreatment-unusual anatomy of a maxillary second and mandibular first premolar: report of two cases. Indian Journal of Dental Research. 2013;24:123–127. doi: 10.4103/0970-9290.114914. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Nallapati S. Three canal mandibular first and second premolars: a treatment approach. A case report. Journal of Endodontics. 2005;31(6):474–476. doi: 10.1097/01.don.0000157986.69173.a6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.de Almeida-Gomes F, de Sousa BC, dos Santos RA. Unusual anatomy of mandibular premolars. Australian Endodontic Journal. 2006;32(1):43–45. doi: 10.1111/j.1747-4477.2006.00009.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Kararia N, Chaudhary A, Kararia V. Mandibular left first premolar with two roots: a morphological oddity. Contemporary Clinical Dentistry. 2012;3:234–236. doi: 10.4103/0976-237X.96840. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Poorni S, Karumaran CS, Indira R. Mandibular rst premolar with two roots and three canals. Australian Endodontic Journal. 2010;36(1):32–34. doi: 10.1111/j.1747-4477.2009.00170.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Moayedi S, Lata D. Mandibular first premolar with three canals. Endodontology. 2004;16:26–29. [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Milano M, Chavarria C, Hoppe J. Multi-rooted mandibular premolars: report of case. Journal of Dentistry for Children. 2002;69(1):63–65. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Kakkar P, Singh A. Mandibular first premolar with three roots: a case report. Iranian Endodontic Journal. 2012;7:207–210. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Chan K, Yew SC, Chao SY. Mandibular premolar with three root canals—two case reports. International Endodontic Journal. 1992;25(5):261–264. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.1992.tb01160.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Fischer GM, Evans CE. A three-rooted mandibular second premolar. General Dentistry. 1992;40(2):139–140. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Cleghorn BM, Christie WH, Dong CCS. Anomalous mandibular premolars: a mandibular first premolar with three roots and a mandibular second premolar with a C-shaped canal system. International Endodontic Journal. 2008;41(11):1005–1014. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2008.01451.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Hülsmann M. Mandibular first premolar with three root canals. Endodontics & Dental Traumatology. 1990;6(4):189–191. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-9657.1990.tb00416.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Yang ZP. Multiple canals in a mandibular first premolar. Case report. Australian Dental Journal. 1994;39(1):18–19. doi: 10.1111/j.1834-7819.1994.tb05540.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Vaghela DJ, Sinha AA. Endodontic management of four rooted mandibular first premolar. Journal of Conservative Dentistry. 2013;16:87–89. doi: 10.4103/0972-0707.105307. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Du Y, Lee AH, Zhang C. Mandibular first premolar with four canals. Journal of Investigative and Clinical Dentistry. 2013;4:64–66. doi: 10.1111/j.2041-1626.2012.00127.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60.Kararia N, Kararia V. Root canal treatment of a mandibular second premolar with atypical canal pattern. Journal of Conservative Dentistry. 2012;15:392–394. doi: 10.4103/0972-0707.101925. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 61.Holtzman L. Root canal treatment of mandivular second premolar with four root canals: a case report. International Endodontic Journal. 1998;31(5):364–366. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2591.1998.00166.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 62.Wong M. Four root canals in a mandibular second premolar. Journal of Endodontics. 1991;17(3):125–126. doi: 10.1016/S0099-2399(06)81744-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 63.Macri E, Zmener O. Five canals in a mandibular second premolar. Journal of Endodontics. 2000;26(5):304–305. doi: 10.1097/00004770-200005000-00016. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 64.Goswami M, Chandra S, Chandra S, Singh S. Mandibular premolar with two roots. Journal of Endodontics. 1997;23(3):p. 187. doi: 10.1016/S0099-2399(97)80274-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 65.Prakash R, Nandini S, Ballal S, Kumar S, Kandaswamy D. Two-rooted mandibular second premolars: case report and survey. Indian Journal of Dental Research. 2008;19(1):70–73. doi: 10.4103/0970-9290.38936. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 66.Rödig T, Hülsmann M. Diagnosis and root canal treatment of a mandibular second premolar with three root canals. International Endodontic Journal. 2003;36(12):912–919. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2003.00750.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 67.De Moor RJG, Calberson FLG. Root canal treatment in a mandibular second premolar with three root canals. Journal of Endodontics. 2005;31(4):310–313. doi: 10.1097/01.don.0000140578.36109.c0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 68.Lotfi M, Vosoughhosseini S, Zand V, Fatemi A, Shyezadeh V, Ranjkesh B. A mandibular second premolar with three canals and atypical orifices. Journal of Oral Science. 2008;50(3):363–366. doi: 10.2334/josnusd.50.363. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 69.Soares LR, Arruda M, de Arruda MP, et al. Diagnosis and root canal treatment in a mandibular premolar with three canals. Brazilian Dental Journal. 2009;20(5):424–427. doi: 10.1590/s0103-64402009000500012. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 70.Shokouhinejad N. Root canal re-treatment of a mandibular second premolar with three root canals: a case report. Australian Endodontic Journal. 2009;35(3):180–182. doi: 10.1111/j.1747-4477.2009.00172.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 71.Aguiar C, Mendes D, Câmara A, Figueiredo J. Endodontic treatment of a mandibular second premolar with three root canals. Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice. 2010;11(2):78–84. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 72.Bram SM, Fleisher R. Endodontic therapy in a mandibular second biscupid with four canals. Journal of Endodontics. 1991;17(10):513–515. doi: 10.1016/s0099-2399(06)81801-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 73.Al-Fouzan KS. The microscopic diagnosis and treatment of a mandibular second premolar with four canals. International Endodontic Journal. 2001;34(5):406–410. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2591.2001.00408.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 74.Rhodes JS. A case of unusual anatomy: a mandibular second premolar with four canals. International Endodontic Journal. 2001;34(8):645–648. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2591.2001.00441.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 75.Tzanetakis GN, Lagoudakos TA, Kontakiotis EG. Endodontic treatment of a mandibular second premolar with four canals using operating microscope. Journal of Endodontics. 2007;33(3):318–321. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2006.08.006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 76.Shalavi S, Mohammadi Z, Abdolrazzaghi M. Root canal treatment of maxillary and mandibular three-rooted premolars: case reports. Iranian Endodontic Journal. 2012;7:161–164. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 77.Mokhtari H, Niknami M, Zand V. Managing a mandibular second premolar with three-canal and taurodontism: a case report. Iranian Endodontic Journal. 2013;8:25–28. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 78.Shapira Y, Delivanis P. Multiple-rooted mandibular second premolars. Journal of Endodontics. 1982;8(5):231–232. doi: 10.1016/S0099-2399(82)80360-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 79.Sachdeva GS, Ballal S, Gopikrishna V, Kandaswamy D. Endodontic management of a mandibular second premolar with four roots and four root canals with the aid of spiral computed tomography: a case report. Journal of Endodontics. 2008;34(1):104–107. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2007.10.004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 80.Farmakis E-T. Four-rooted mandibular second premolar. Australian Endodontic Journal. 2008;34(3):126–128. doi: 10.1111/j.1747-4477.2007.00092.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 81.Hartup GR. Dens invaginatus type III in a mandibular premolar. General Dentistry. 1997;45(6):584–587. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 82.Bramante CM, de Sousa SMG, Tavano SMR. Dens invaginatus in mandibular first premolar. Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology. 1993;76(3):p. 389. doi: 10.1016/0030-4220(93)90276-a. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 83.Tavano SM, de Sousa SM, Bramante CM. Dens invaginatus in first mandibular premolar. Endodontics & Dental Traumatology. 1994;10(1):27–29. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-9657.1994.tb00595.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 84.Aryanpour S, Bercy P, Van Nieuwenhuysen J-P. Endodontic and periodontal treatments of a geminated mandibular first premolar. International Endodontic Journal. 2002;35(2):209–214. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2591.2002.00464.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 85.Er K, Kuştarci A, Özan Ü, Taşdemir T. Nonsurgical endodontic treatment of dens invaginatus in a mandibular premolar with large periradicular lesion: a case report. Journal of Endodontics. 2007;33(3):322–324. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2006.09.001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 86.Canger E, Kayipmaz S, Celenk P. Bilateral dens invaginatus in the mandibular premolar region. Indian Journal of Dental Research. 2009;20(2):238–240. doi: 10.4103/0970-9290.52887. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 87.Koh ET, Pitt Ford TR, Kariyawasam SP, Chen NN, Torabinejad M. Prophylactic treatment of dens evaginatus using mineral trioxide aggregate. Journal of Endodontics. 2001;27(8):540–542. doi: 10.1097/00004770-200108000-00010. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 88.Tsesis I, Steinbock N, Rosenberg E, Kaufman AY. Endodontic treatment of developmental anomalies in posterior teeth: treatment of geminated/fused teeth—report of two cases. International Endodontic Journal. 2003;36(5):372–379. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2591.2003.00666.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 89.Sathish Muthukumar R, Arunkumar S, Sadasiva K. Bilateral fusion of mandibular second premolar and supernumerary tooth: a rare case report. Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Pathology. 2012;16(1):128–130. doi: 10.4103/0973-029X.92990. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 90.Demiryürek EO, Gonulol N, Bulucu B. Endodontic treatment of a taurodontic premolar with five canals. Australian Endodontic Journal. 2013;39:81–84. doi: 10.1111/j.1747-4477.2010.00250.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 91.Kusiak A, Sadlak-Nowicka J, Limon J, Kochańska B. Root morphology of mandibular premolars in 40 patients with Turner syndrome. International Endodontic Journal. 2005;38(11):822–826. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2005.01023.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 92.Scott R, Turner C., II . The Anthropology of Modern Human Teeth. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 2000. [Google Scholar]
  • 93.Carns EJ, Skidmore AE. Configurations and deviations of root canals of maxillary first premolars. Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology. 1973;36(6):880–886. doi: 10.1016/0030-4220(73)90340-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 94.Seidberg BH, Altman M, Guttuso J, Suson M. Frequency of two mesiobuccal root canals in maxillary permanent first molars. The Journal of the American Dental Association. 1973;87(4):852–856. doi: 10.14219/jada.archive.1973.0489. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 95.Madeira MC, Hetem S. Incidence of bifurcations in mandibular incisors. Oral Surgery Oral Medicine and Oral Pathology. 1973;36(4):589–591. doi: 10.1016/0030-4220(73)90318-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 96.Kaffe I, Kaufman A, Littner MM, Lazarson A. Radiographic study of the root canal system of mandibular anterior teeth. International Endodontic Journal. 1985;18(4):253–259. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.1985.tb00452.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 97.Ordinola-Zapata R, Bramante CM, Villas-Boas MH, Cavenago BC, Duarte MA, Versiani MA. Morphologic micro-computed tomography analysis of mandibular premolars with three root canals. Journal of Endodontics. 2013;39(9):1130–1135. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2013.02.007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 98.Pucci FM, Reig R. Conductos Radiculares. Vol. I. Buenos Aires, Argentina: Editorial Medico-Quirurgica; 1944. [Google Scholar]
  • 99.Cleghorn BM, Christie WH, Dong CCS. The root and root canal morphology of the human mandibular first premolar: a literature review. Journal of Endodontics. 2007;33(5):509–516. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2006.12.004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 100.Cleghorn BM, Christie WH, Dong CCS. The root and root canal morphology of the human mandibular second premolar: a literature review. Journal of Endodontics. 2007;33(9):1031–1037. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2007.03.020. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

The data extrapolated through the statistics is attached as supplementary file.

Click here for additional data file. (25.2KB, xlsx)

Articles from Anatomy Research International are provided here courtesy of Wiley

RESOURCES