Check Page Ranking

Dental tourism
New additions
Dental books
FREE journals
Bad breath
Kids caries
Smoking effects
Patient info
Dental Videos
Latest news
ROOTS cases
Wisdom tooth
Drugs of choice

Endo tips    Better Endo    Endo abstracts    Endo discussions

  Multiple access preps and poorly bonded composites

The opinions and photographs within this web page are not ours. Authors have been credited for the individual posts where they are. -
From: Terry Pannkuk
Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2009 6:40 AM
Subject: [roots] Today's Exam

I basically see this all the time and this is a case from today. When someone preaches conservative endo access and
restoration driven endodontics, this is what you get:

....this patient has had "on-and-off" subtle discomfort for the last 15 years when this work was done.  I suspect that
the dentist who performed the endo "didn't want to mess up the new crowns". :)


.......multiple "ship-in-a-bottle" access preps filled with poorly bonded composites........several teeth thatt tested
"different" to percussion......radiographs showing numerous short-filled endos with likely missed canals and no evidence
of hydraulically filled lateral/accessory canals.......the bicuspid with the post was moderately percussion sensitive.

"Restorative-driven endodontics" usually means building a house on a foundation of sand.

Isn't it better to idealize the foundation then build the house?....or...maybe if you don't like the geological report
don't build the house at all! :) - Terry

Multiple access preps

Terry, I preach preservation of tooth structure, especially the PCD, not "preservation of porcelain"
There is a big difference.
Here is the concept of a stepped access for the fifty-billionth time.
It is not so different from the concepts in your drawings except that the expendibility of the restorative materials is
made opposed to your drawings which appear to access a virgin molar... something I don't get to do very
much... John A Khademy

Multiple access preps

Multiple access preps

Multiple access preps Your examples do not show direct line access to all orifices and you haven't established convenience form. This leads to incomplete treatment and poor debridement. Some PCD has to be removed in strategic areas depending upon the case. You can't make cardinal rules about access geometry and PCD preservation. When you compromise the access, you compromise the endodontic case, and ultimately predispose the case to a higher probability of failure...or even worse a subtle failure that aggravates the patient for decades.. Attached is a 5 canal maxillary molar case I started this morning. As you can see on the radiograph, the palatal canal system is wide, anomalous and could even have a major apical bifurcation. The anatomy dictated the access extension and the strategic extended removal of PCD in the area of the wide palatal orifice, the DB2 and the MB2. This patient is never going to suffer or lose this tooth because of that dentin removal....but failure to look for those canals and inadequate cleaning quite possibly could have condemned him to a a life of subtle discomfort described as being "aware of the tooth". Incomplete access, leads to, incomplete endo and clinical mediocrity. Anatomy and convenience form dictates the access. It is only the most exotic cases with aberrant anatomy that prevent that from being doable. - Terry Multiple access preps

Multiple access preps One question for you John Iím not going to debate the necessity of a larger access with you. I think Terry has that covered. But I do have one observation: It does seem that much of the ability to manage an access in the manner you describe, has to do with two factors: (1) The ability to get sufficient light into the depths of the access - to properly illuminate the pulpal floor. (2) Proper magnification (combined with high powered co-axial light) to be able to recognize these subtle structures. The most recent statistics have shown that only a very small % of practitioners have a scope (or are likely to get one in the near future). If this is the case, would it not be more valuable to enlarge the access sufficiently (I DONíT mean bashing the floor) to be able to see better? Is this a fair tradeoff under the circumstances if they donít use a scope? Many times it is a matter of illumination the ability to see. And for that you need a BIGGER access. I think it is great that you can do this as conservatively as you do but if I try to teach this to my referrals, they are gonna miss a LOT of stuff. In that aspect I strongly agree with Terry. Iíd rather that they were a little more liberal with their access rather than conservative. If anything, most of the retreats I see are because of INSUFFICIENT access rather than being bashed. Can we really expect clinicians to do this routinely w/o a scope? - RobK Good points. What should be clear is that we shouldn't be scoring points on who agrees with us. We should be thriving on disagreement and the uncomfortable growth of intellectual disagreement. Philosophy is stengthened and validated on contention. We learn nothing by having people agreeing with us. I've probably made quite a few enemies by taking this to the extreme online, something I'm very uncomfortable doing in real life. Point/Counterpoint discussioins are really fun. I feel very strong debating endodontic access philosophy with John, very inadequate debating microbiology with Fred, and I learned I didn't know crap when I tried to debate Cone Beam Technology specs with Gary Henkel about a year ago.. :):):) - Terry I don't recall the cone beam discussion, as I know just about enough to be dangerous on most subjects. But terry's point is well taken. There is nothing wrong with professional difference of opinion. I've reversed my position a couple of times based on frank dialogue. Just needs to keep the personal attack aspects out of the discussion. Procedures can be done differently, and both get quality results. Terry hits a 9 iron, I hit a 7 degree driver because he is 8 clubs longer than I am. Still has to go in the hole - gary

Searching for MB2
Implants #18, #19
Nice retrofil
Molars with lesions
Tooth #4
Apex locators
Large Apex
Access pictures
Lower incisor retreatment
Horror case
porcelain onlay
Conservative access
Peri radicular healing
Beautiful cases
Resilon cases
Unusual Apex
Noemi cases
2 upper molars
2 Anterior teeth
Tooth #35
Anecrotic molar
Direct capping
Molar cracks
Obstructed buccals
File broken in tooth
Separated instrument
Dental Products
Dental videos
2 year trauma
Squirt on mesials
dens update
Palatal root exits
Color map 3
Middle mesial
Continuous pain
Anterior MTA
Previous trauma
Ideal case
Dens Evaginitis