European Archives of Paediatric Dentistry

, Volume 10, Supplement 1, pp 49–53 | Cite as

Cone-beam CT imaging in the management of a double tooth

  • S. Lucey
  • N. Heath
  • R. R. Welbury
  • G. WrightEmail author
Case report


BACKGROUND: The diagnosis and management strategies of double teeth have largely relied on clinical examination and conventional radiographic findings. Cone-Beam Computed Tomography (Cone-beam CT) was developed in the late 1990’s and, therefore, is a relatively recent addition to the imaging armamentarium for use in Maxillofacial Radiology. There have been no publications in the dental literature demonstrating the use of Cone-beam CT or 3D stereolithography in the diagnosis and surgical planning of the management of double teeth. CASE REPORT: An 11 year old girl presented with a double left lateral maxillary incisor. Conventional plain film radiography failed to provide the requisite information for pre-operative planning. Cone-beam Computed Tomography (Cone-beam CT) allowed determination of location of fusion, three-dimensional (3D) visualisation of pulpal anatomy and the construction of a 3D stereolithographic model for surgical planning. The double tooth was surgically divided in situ under local analgesia. The redundant distal unit was extracted and the residual mesial unit built up in composite resin following physiological mesial drift of displaced maxillary left canine. No endodontic therapy was required. FOLLOW-UP: At a 10-month follow-up visit, clinical and radiographic vitality and success was noted. CONCLUSION: The great amount of radiological information which Cone-beam CT can offer not only improves pre-operative and surgical planning, but the 3D models provided can be used to further educate and inform patients and guardians in the management of double teeth.

Key words

Double tooth Fusion Germination Cone beam-computed tomography Stereolithography 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Ammari AB, Young RG, Welbury RR, Fung DE. A report of treatment of a fused permanent central incisor and supplemental lateral incisor. Dent Update 2008; 35: 636–641.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Arai Y, Tammisalo E, Iwai K, Hashimoto K, Shinoda K. Development of a compact computed tomographic apparatus for dental use. Dentomaxillofacial Radiology 1999; 28: 245–248.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aryanpour S, Bercy P, Van Nieuwenhuysen, J-P. Endodontic and periodontal treatments of a geminated mandibular frst premolar. Int Endod J 2002; 35: 209–214.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Braun A, Appel T, Frentzen M. Endodontic and surgical treatment of a geminated maxillary incisor. Int Endod J 2003; 36: 380–386.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Crawford NL, North S, Davidson LE. Double permanent incisor teeth: management of three cases. Dent Update 2006; 33: 608–610.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Crawford PJM and Aldred MJ. Anomalies of tooth formation and eruption: in Welbury RR, Duggal MS and Hosey MT: Paediatric Dentistry 3rd Edn. Oxford Medical Publications 2005, p301-302.Google Scholar
  7. Danesh G, Schrijnemakers T, Lippold C, Schafer E. A fused maxillary central incisor with dens evaginatus as a talon cusp. Angle Orthod 2004; 77: 176–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gröndahl H-G, Huumonen S. Radiographic manifestations of periapical infammatory lesions. Endodontic Topics 2004; 8: 55–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hong HH, Tsai AI, Liang CH, et al. Preserving pulpal health of a geminated maxillary lateral incisor through multidisciplinary care. Int Endod J 2006; 39: 730–737.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hülsmann M, Bahr R, Grohmann U. Hemisection and vital treatment of a fused tooth. Endod Dent Traumatol 1997;13:253–258.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Karacay S, Guven G, Koymen R. Management of a fused central incisor in association with a macrodont lateral incisor: a case report. Pediatr Dent 2006; 28: 336–340.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. MacLeod I and Heath N. Cone-Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) in Dental Practice. Dent Update 2008; 35: 590–598.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Mozzo P, Procacci C, Tacconi A, Martini PT, Andreis IA. A new volumetric CT machine for dental imaging based on the cone-beam technique: preliminary results. European Radiology 1998; 8: 1558–1564.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Patel S, Darwood A, Pitt Ford T, Whaites E. The potential applications of cone beam computed tomography in the management of endodontic problems. Int Endod J 2007; 40: 818–830.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Scarfe WC, Farman AG, Sukovic P. Clinical applications of cone-beam computed tomography in dental practice. J Can Dent Assoc 2006; 72: 75–80.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Sivolella S, Bressan E, Mirabal V, Stellini E, Berengo M. Extraoral endodontic treatment, odontotomy and intentional replantation of a double maxillary lateral permanent incisor: case report and 6-year follow-up. Int Endod J 2008; 41: 538–546.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Soames JV and Southam JC. Disorders of Development of Teeth: in Soames JV and Southam JC: Oral Pathology 4th Edn. Oxford University Press 2005, p7.Google Scholar
  18. Tsurumachi T, Kuno T. Endodontic and orthodontic treatment of a cross-bite fused maxillary lateral incisor. Int Endod J 2003; 36: 135–142.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Adis International 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Dept. Paediatric DentistryUniversity of Glasgow Dental Hospital and SchoolGlasgowScotland

Personalised recommendations