Calculus‐like deposit on the apical external root surface of teeth with post‐treatment apical periodontitis: report of two cases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To report two cases in which calculus-like material was found on external root surfaces of (i) an extracted root and (ii) an apicected part of a root, both of which were removed due to post-treatment refractory apical periodontitis. SUMMARY: In each case, there was a fistulous tract, which did not heal after conventional root canal treatment. The first case did not heal even after apical surgery, and subsequent tooth extraction revealed calculus-like material on a root surface of complex anatomy. The second case showed radiographic signs of healing after apicectomy. Histology of the apical biopsy revealed a calculus-like material on the external surface of the root apex. It is suggested that the presence of calculus on the root surfaces of teeth with periapical lesions may contribute towards the aetiology of failure. KEY LEARNING POINTS: Biofilm on the external root surface has been implicated in the failure of apical periodontitis to heal, despite adequate root canal treatment. Calculus-like material was found, in two cases, on the root surface of teeth with post-treatment apical periodontitis, where the only communication externally was a sinus tract.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".