Comparing the Traditional Versus Conservative Endodontic Access Cavities Design of the Maxillary First Molar: Using Cone-Beam Computed Tomography

Huachao Sui; Bo Zhao; Haidan Nie; Xin Hao; Feng Qiao; Cuicui Sun; Changyi Li; Liwen Zhou; Ligeng Wu

doi:10.12659/MSM.932410

13 October 2021 : Clinical Research

Comparing the Traditional Versus Conservative Endodontic Access Cavities Design of the Maxillary First Molar: Using Cone-Beam Computed Tomography

Huachao Sui^1ABE, Bo Zhao^2ABE, Haidan Nie^3BE, Xin Hao^1BG, Feng Qiao^4C, Cuicui Sun^3C, Changyi Li^5G, Liwen Zhou^3E, Ligeng Wu^3AG*

DOI: 10.12659/MSM.932410

Med Sci Monit 2021; 27:e932410

Authors information Article notes Copyright and License information

Background Material and Methods Results Discussion Conclusions References

Related articles Order reprints Share article Share by email

View HTML version

Figure 4 Analysis of differences in RCOPA and PHPA in males and females. (A) Comparative analysis of the area of RCOPA and PHPA in males (n=198). (B) Comparative analysis of the area of RCOPA and PHPA in females (n=302). (C) Comparative analysis of the ratio of PHPA to RCOPA between males and females. PHPA – pulp horn projection-connecting lines area; RCOPA – root canal orifice projection-connecting lines area.

Back to the Article

Comparing the Traditional Versus Conservative Endodontic Access Cavities Design of the Maxillary First Molar: Using Cone-Beam Computed Tomography

Your Privacy