Endodontic treatment of a C‐shaped mandibular second molar with narrow dentinal thickness: A case report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Formulating an effective root canal treatment plan necessitates clinician awareness of the complexities of the root canal system and possible anatomic challenges. The C-shaped canal variation accompanying the radicular lingual groove makes the lingual dentinal wall so thin that cleaning and shaping of canals require accurate management. This report presents endodontic treatment of a C-shaped mandibular second molar diagnosed with pulpal necrosis and asymptomatic apical periodontitis, that initial radiographic assessment revealed extremely thin (0.3 mm) width of the lingual wall of the canals prone to perforation. Mechanical preparation was performed through the anti-curvature technique and basically by chemical irrigation rather than mechanical instrumentation. The C-shaped isthmus was prepared up to 25/02 rotary system without dentinal defect while maintaining adequate dentin thickness so as to not significantly reduce the strength of the root. Follow-up radiographs showed normal periodontal ligament and lamina dura indicating significant healing of the periapical lesion.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.011 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".