• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.39 no.3
• /
• pp.210-214
• /
• 2014

Objectives: To investigate the prevalence of different primary reasons for endodontic referrals and the clinical symptoms of the referred cases. Materials and Methods: Clinical data of total endodontic treatment cases (1,014 teeth) including endodontic referral cases (224 teeth) between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2012, at Kangdong Sacred Heart Hospital, were investigated retrospectively. The one major reason for referral, the clinical symptoms, and the resulting treatment procedures of referral cases were recorded. The percentages of clinical symptoms of the endodontic referral cases and the total endodontic treatment cases were compared by ${\chi}^2$ test for each symptom. Results: Persistent pain was the most frequent reason for endodontic referral (29.5%), followed by presence of gingival swelling and sinus tract (24.1%), and apical radiolucency (12.9%). Referrals in cases involving endodontic difficulties such as canal calcification, broken instruments, post, perforation, and resorption were less than 5.0%, respectively. The percentages of four major clinical symptoms of pain, apical radiolucency, previous endodontic treatment, and gingival swelling and sinus tract were significantly higher in the endodontic referral cases than those in the total endodontic cases (p = 0.001). Among the included referral cases, 72.8% were treated with nonsurgical endodontic treatment only. Teeth other than the referred teeth were diagnosed as the origin of the problem in 5.8% of the referrals. Conclusions: The high prevalence of pain, apical radiolucency, previous treatment, and gingival swelling and sinus tract in endodontic referral cases suggest that these symptoms may be what general practitioners consider to be difficult and refer to endodontists.

• Journal of Dental Rehabilitation and Applied Science
• /
• v.35 no.3
• /
• pp.143-152
• /
• 2019

Purpose: The aim of this study is to investigate the characteristics of patients and teeth referred to a university dental hospital for endodontic problem. Materials and Methods: From January, 2017 to December, 2018, patients who were referred to a university dental hospital for endodontic problem were collected from clinical records. A total of 1171 patient records were analyzed. The status of the referred teeth was divided into three groups according to whether they were treated endodontically based on radiographs and clinical records at the time of referred visit. Results: 69.9% of the referred teeth were maxillary and mandibular first and second molars. The average time from referral to actual visit is 9.03 days and 65.6% of the case referred with referring letter. The most primary reasons of referral were persistent clinical symptom (pain, swelling, and sinus tract) (37.9%), diagnosis difficulty (16.7%), blockage of canal space (13.8%) and difficult tooth anatomy (11.4%). In the case of referral before endodontic treatment, the most primary reason of referral was failure to make a proper diagnosis. If the teeth were referred in the middle of endodontic treatment, the most primary reason of referral was persistent clinical symptom and blockage of canal space. In the case of referral after root canal filling, the most primary reason of referral was persistent clinical symptom. Conclusion: In the case of molars, the rate of persistent clinical symptom and blockage of canal space were the most primary reason of referral, and the rate of apical surgery and management of trauma was high in the case of anterior teeth.

• The Journal of the Korean dental association
• /
• v.57 no.8
• /
• pp.428-436
• /
• 2019

In cases of a patient referral, the general dentist should communicate the patient's dental information as clearly as possible to the specialist to whom he/she is referring his/her patient. For this reason, it is necessary to write a referral letter in an accurate and complete manner. The purpose of this study is to analyze the referral letters of patients who are referred to the department of conservative dentistry in a dental university hospital. From January, 2017 to December, 2018, we gathered the information of the patients who were referred to the department of conservative dentistry in a dental university hospital with referral letter. We evaluated the fidelity of a total of 750 referral letters and recorded the information of the referral dentist and the dental clinic. The relationship between each item and fidelity was analyzed using SPSS 18.0 program. The analysis of the contents of the referral letters yielded the following results: The fidelity of the referral letter was higher when the patient was referred during the root canal treatment, or when there was a root canal filling or when there was pain during chewing. The fidelity of referral letter was low in cases where the referring clinic is close to and has cooperative relationship with dental university hospital. Among the factors affecting the fidelity, the year of graduation of the referral dentist was the most influential. This study confirmed the fact that the clinical practice of writing patient referral letters still leaves much to be desired. In order to solve this problem, it is necessary to create more clear and standardized guidelines for writing referral letters.

• Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science
• /
• v.35 no.1
• /
• pp.177-185
• /
• 2005

The purpose of the study was to investigate the influence of an endodontic infection on presence of furcation involvement in periodontally-involved mandibular molars. All first and second mandibualr molars in 45 patients were selected if at least one was root-filled or had a possible periapical radiolucency. The sample consisted of patients from a referral population at a periodotnal clinic which represented an adult population with a mean age of 47.5 years (range 31 to 63) For mandibular molars with periapical destruction at both roots, frequency of horizontal furcation depth ${\geqq}$ 3 mm was significantly more compared to teeth without periapical destruction. Mean periodontal probing depth was significantly greater at mandibular molars with periapical destruction. It is suggested that a root canal infection in periodontitis-involved molars may potentiate periodontitis progression by spreading of endodontic pathgens through patent accessory canals and dentinal tubules. In conclusion, an endodontic infection in mandibular molars was found to be associated with additional attachment loss in the furcation area, and may thus be considered to be one of several risk factors influencing the prognosis of molars in periodontitis-prone patients.

• Journal of Oral Medicine and Pain
• /
• v.32 no.4
• /
• pp.455-460
• /
• 2007

Majority of toothache is caused by abnormality of pulpal or periodontal tissues. However, there are numerous nonodontogenic sources that may be responsible for pain felt in the tooth. Nonodontogenic toothache may result from muscle, maxillary sinus, neuropathic, neurovascular, even cardiac and psychogenic problems. Myofascial pain is one of the most common abnormality characterized by palpation of a hard band which acts as the trigger point that causes stiffness and fatigue of the muscle, referral pain in tooth, tension-type headache, and hyperalgesia. Masseter muscle particularly induce referral pain in maxillary and mandibular molars. This case reported the treatment of the pain in right mandibular molar originated from myofascial pain of the right masseter. The pain is improved by general and reversible treatments such as muscle exercise, physical therapy, and medication. Nonodontogenic toothache should undergo proper differential diagnosis in order to avoid unnecessary dental treatments, such as endodontic, periodontic treatment, and tooth extraction, which would fail to alleviate the symptom of the patient.

• Journal of Oral Medicine and Pain
• /
• v.25 no.2
• /
• pp.235-240
• /
• 2000

This study was carried out among 34 patients who visited Yonsei Dental Hospital from 1996. 1. to 1999. 5 for trigeminal neuralgia. By studying the patient's treatment prior to visiting our hospital, features of trigeminal neuralgia, treatment process of trigeminal neuralgia, prognosis of treatment, consultation with other professions and involvement of surgery, etc., the results are as follows: 1. 67.7% of onset age range from 40s to 60s, and average age is 50.2. 2. Ratio of right to left involvement is 1:2.1, male to female ratio is 1:1.9. 3. Occurrence rate of each branch is V3(44.1%), V2(11.8%), V1+V2+V3(11.8), V1+V2(8.8%). 4. Treatments prior to admission to our hospital are extraction(5.9%), endodontic treatment(5.9%), medication(11.8%), Oriental Medicine treatment(5.9%). 5. Routes of admittance to our hospital are by their preference(55.9%), local clinic referral(32.4%), E.N.T referral(5.9%), Neurology referral(5.9%). 6. 70.6% of patients treated at our hospital who were relieved of symptoms, were referred to Neurology(66.7%) and Pain Clinic(33.3%) for the reason of relapse, side effects of the drug itself, incomplete relief of pain. 7. 2 patients who were referred to medical part showed brain vessels contacting trigeminal nerve root on Brain MRangiography. But pain is being controlled by medication and no specific surgical procedure was carried out. The results show that 17.7% of patients admitted received inappropriate early treatment. In order to relieve tooth loss and patient's psychologic stress due to inappropriate treatment, precise differential diagnosis must be made among local teeth disease and idiopathic facial pain. Medication may show side effects of the drug itself, incomplete relief of pain or relapse of symptoms. Therefore, to treat trigeminal neuralgia appropriately by drug injection, surgery or radiation therapy, consultations among dentists, neurologists and anesthesiologists are required.