References

Health Education England. The Topol review. Preparing the healthcare workforce to deliver the digital future. 2019. https://topol.hee.nhs.uk/ (accessed July 2021)
Hancocks S. The democratisation of dentistry. Br Dent J. 2019; 226 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-019-0016-1
Kholasi T. Is it time to digitally enable dentistry with the rest of healthcare?. Br Dent J. 2017; 223 https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2017.911
NHS England. Next steps on the NHS five year forward view. 2017. http://www.england.nhs.uk/publication/next-steps-on-the-nhs-five-year-forward-view/ (accessed July 2021)
Royal College of Surgeons of England. Future of surgery. 2017. https://futureofsurgery.rcseng.ac.uk/ (accessed July 2021)
Di Filippo G, Sidhu SK, Chong BS. Apical periodontitis and the technical quality of root canal treatment in an adult sub-population in London. Br Dent J. 2014; 216 https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2014.404
Sjogren U, Hagglund B, Sundqvist G, Wing K. Factors affecting the long-term results of endodontic treatment. J Endod. 1990; 16:498-504 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0099-2399(07)80180-4
Chugal NM, Clive JM, Spångberg LS. Endodontic infection: some biologic and treatment factors associated with outcome. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2003; 96:81-90 https://doi.org/10.1016/s1079-2104(02)91703-8
Lin S, Sabbah W, Sedgley CM, Whitten B. A survey for endodontists in today's economy: exploring the current state of endodontics as a profession and the relationship between endodontists and their referral base. J Endod. 2015; 41:325-32 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2014.11.007
Ng YL, Mann V, Gulabivala K. A prospective study of the factors affecting outcomes of non-surgical root canal treatment: part 2: tooth survival. Int Endod J. 2011; 44:610-625 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2011.01873.x
Ng YL, Mann V, Rahbaran S, Lewsey J, Gulabivala K. Outcome of primary root canal treatment: systematic review of the literature – Part 2. Influence of clinical factors. Int Endod J. 2008; 41:6-31 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2007.01323.x
Ng YL, Mann V, Gulabivala K. Outcome of secondary root canal treatment: a systematic review of the literature. Int Endod J. 2008; 41:1026-46 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2008.01484.x
Ng YL, Mann V, Gulabivala K. A prospective study of the factors affecting outcomes of nonsurgical root canal treatment: part 1: periapical health. Int Endod J. 2011; 44:583-609 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2011.01872.x
Pettiette MT, Delano EO, Trope M. Evaluation of success rate of endodontic treatment performed by students with stainless-steel K-files and nickel-titanium hand files. J Endod. 2001; 27:124-127 https://doi.org/10.1097/00004770-200102000-00017
Sonntag D, Delschen S, Stachniss V. Root-canal shaping with manual and rotary Ni-Ti files performed by students. Int Endod J. 2003; 36:715-723 https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2591.2003.00703.x
Yared G, Bou Dagher F, Kulkarni K. Influence of torque control motors and the operator's proficiency on ProTaper failures. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2003; 96:229-233 https://doi.org/10.1016/s1079-2104(03)00167-7
Haug SR, Solfjeld AF, Ranheim LE, Bårdsen A. Impact of case difficulty on endodontic mishaps in an undergraduate student clinic. J Endod. 2018; 44:1088-1095 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2018.03.012
General Dental Council. Moving upstream. 2019. http://www.gdc-uk.org/docs/default-source/moving-upstream/moving-upstream-report.pdf?sfvrsn=e9984d51_4 (accessed July 2021)
Ree MH, Timmerman MF, Wesselink PR. An evaluation of the usefulness of two endodontic case assessment forms by general dentists. Int Endod J. 2003; 36:545-555 https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2591.2003.00688.x
Ghotane SG, Al-Haboubi M, Kendall N Dentists with enhanced skills (special interest) in endodontics: gatekeepers views in London. BMC Oral Health. 2015; 15 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-015-0085-8
Al-Haboubi M, Eliyas S, Briggs PF Dentists with extended skills: the challenge of innovation. Br Dent J. 2014; 217 https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2014.652
Falcon HC, Richardson P, Shaw MJ Developing an index of restorative dental treatment need. Br Dent J. 2001; 190:479-486 https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.4801010a
Rosenberg RJ, Goodis HE. Endodontic case selection: to treat or to refer. J Am Dent Assoc. 1992; 123:57-63 https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.1992.0321
Canadian Academy of Endodontics. Standards of practice. 2017. http://www.caendo.ca/about/standards-of-practice/ (accessed July 2021)
American Association of Endodontists. AAE Endodontic case difficulty assessment form and guidelines. http://www.aae.org/specialty/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2019/02/19AAE_CaseDifficultyAssessmentForm.pdf (accessed July 2021)
Shah PK, Chong BS. A web-based endodontic case difficulty assessment tool. Clin Oral Investig. 2018; 22:2381-2388 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-018-2341-1
Shah PK, Duncan HF, Abdullah D, Tomson PL, Murray G, Friend TM, Thomas S, Butcher S, Chong BS. Comparison of two case difficulty assessment methods on cohorts of undergraduate dental students – a multi-centre study. Int Endod J. 2020; 53:1569-1580 https://doi.org/10.1111/iej.13377
NHS England. NHS dental services in England. An independent review led by Professor Jimmy Steele. 2009. http://www.sigwales.org/wp-content/uploads/dh_101180.pdf (accessed July 2021)
Tickle M, McDonald R, Franklin J Paying for the wrong kind of performance? Financial incentives and behaviour changes in National Health Service dentistry 1992–2009. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2011; 39:465-473 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0528.2011.00622.x
NHS England. Commissioning Standard for Restorative Dentistry. 2019. http://www.england.nhs.uk/publication/commissioning-standard-for-restorative-dentistry/ (accessed July 2021)
Chong BS. No win, no fee. ENDO (Lond Engl). 2015; 9:155-156
General Dental Council. Scope of practice. 2019. http://www.gdc-uk.org/information-standards-guidance/standards-and-guidance/scope-of-practice (accessed July 2021)
General Dental Council. Standards for the dental team. 2019. http://www.gdc-uk.org/information-standards-guidance/standards-and-guidance/standards-for-the-dental-team (accessed July 2021)
Kerstein R. Life through a HoloLens. Bull R Coll Surg Engl. 2018; 100:333-334 https://doi.org/10.1308/rcsbull.2018.333
Suenaga H, Hoang Tran H, Liao H Real-time in situ three-dimensional integral videography and surgical navigation using augmented reality: a pilot study. Int J Oral Sci. 2013; 5:98-102 https://doi.org/10.1038/ijos.2013.26
Suenaga H, Tran HH, Liao H Vision-based markerless registration using stereo vision and an augmented reality surgical navigation system: a pilot study. BMC Med Imaging. 2015; 15 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12880-015-0089-5
Marmulla R, Hoppe H, Mühling J, Eggers G. An augmented reality system for image-guided surgery. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2005; 34:594-596 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2005.05.004
Traub J, Stefan P, Heining SM Hybrid navigation interface for orthopedic and trauma surgery. Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv. 2006; 9:373-380 https://doi.org/10.1007/11866565_46
Katić D, Spengler P, Bodenstedt S A system for context-aware intraoperative augmented reality in dental implant surgery. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. 2015; 10:101-108 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-014-1005-0
Bruellmann DD, Tjaden H, Schwanecke U, Barth P. An optimized video system for augmented reality in endodontics: a feasibility study. Clin Oral Investig. 2013; 17:441-448 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-012-0718-0
Krasner P, Rankow HJ. Anatomy of the pulp-chamber floor. J Endod. 2004; 30:5-16 https://doi.org/10.1097/00004770-200401000-00002
Edwards PJ, King AP, Hawkes DJ Stereo augmented reality in the surgical microscope. Stud Health Technol Inform. 1999; 62:102-108
Jawad A. Google Glass: a valid tool for surgical education? A case study. Bull R Coll Surg Engl. 2015; 97:427-429 https://doi.org/10.1308/rcsbull.2015.427
Trampleasure O, Jawad A, Buckle V, Ahmed S. Technology in health: wearables, augmented reality and virtual reality. Bull R Coll Surg Engl. 2015; 97:435-438 https://doi.org/10.1308/rcsbull.2015.435
Whitaker M, Kuku E. Google Glass: The future for surgical training?. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2014; 96 https://doi.org/10.1308/147363514X13990346756445
Cohn SA. Treatment choices for negative outcomes with non-surgical root canal treatment: non-surgical retreatment vs. surgical retreatment vs. implants. Endod Topics. 2005; 11:4-24
White SN, Miklus VG, Potter KS Endodontics and implants, a catalog of therapeutic contrasts. J Evid Based Dent Pract. 2006; 6:101-109 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebdp.2005.12.013
Barnes JJ, Patel S, Mannocci F. Why do general dental practitioners refer to a specific specialist endodontist in practice?. Int Endod J. 2011; 44:21-32 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2010.01791.x
Buchanan JA. Use of simulation technology in dental education. J Dent Educ. 2001; 65:1225-1231
Miki Y, Muramatsu C, Hayashi T Classification of teeth in cone-beam CT using deep convolutional neural network. Comput Biol Med. 2017; 80:24-29 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compbiomed.2016.11.003
Chen H, Zhang K, Lyu P A deep learning approach to automatic teeth detection and numbering based on object detection in dental periapical films. Sci Rep. 2019; 9 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-40414-y
Lee JH, Kim DH, Jeong SN, Choi SH. Detection and diagnosis of dental caries using a deep learning-based convolutional neural network algorithm. J Dent. 2018; 77:106-111 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2018.07.015
Krois J, Ekert T, Meinhold L Deep learning for the radiographic detection of periodontal bone loss. Sci Rep. 2019; 9 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-44839-3
Orhan K, Bayrakdar IS, Ezhov M Evaluation of artificial intelligence for detecting periapical pathosis on cone-beam computed tomography scans. Int Endod J. 2020; 53:680-689 https://doi.org/10.1111/iej.13265
Part 1. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2018; 100
Robotics. Part 2. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2018; 100
Gulrez T, Shahid AK, Sana U, Chaudhary NG. Visual guided robotic endodontic therapeutic system.Karachi: IEEE; 2010
WHO Group Consultation on Health Telematics. A health telematics policy in support of WHO's Health-for-all strategy for global health development (WHO/DGO/98.1). 1998. https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/63857 (accessed July 2021)

Get Smart – technological innovations in endodontics part 2: case-difficulty assessment and future perspectives

From Volume 48, Issue 7, July 2021 | Pages 556-562

Authors

Pratik Kamalkant Shah

BDS, MJDF RCS Eng, MSc, MEndo RCS Edin, FHEA

Clinical Lecturer in Endodontics, Institute of Dentistry, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London.

Articles by Pratik Kamalkant Shah

Email Pratik Kamalkant Shah

Qianni Zhang

PhD

Senior Lecturer, School of Electronic Engineering and Computer Science, Queen Mary University of London.

Articles by Qianni Zhang

Bun San Chong

BDS, MSc, PhD, LDS, FDS RCS Eng, FDS RCS Edin, MFGDP (UK), MRD, FHEA

Professor of Restorative Dentistry/Honorary Consultant, Academic Endodontic Lead, Institute of Dentistry, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry.

Articles by Bun San Chong

Abstract

Given the importance of risk management to avoid mishaps, to achieve a quality result and to ensure a favourable outcome, challenging endodontic cases are best treated by clinicians with the appropriate level of training and experience. Digital and technological innovations in endodontics have led to the development of web-based and smartphone-compatible case-difficulty assessment tools that can help less-experienced dentists identify endodontic management complexities. These interactive tools may also be used for other applications, including primary and secondary care triage, research and dental education. Similarly, advances such as artificial intelligence and mixed reality technologies, are predicted to also benefit endodontics and help support dentists in the management of complex endodontic cases.

CPD/Clinical Relevance: Digital and technological developments may help improve the management and treatment of endodontic cases.

Article

Scientific and technological developments have permeated every aspect of everyday life, including healthcare. A recently published report1 on the UK's publicly funded National Health Service (NHS) envisages the application of new technologies to empower patients, reduce strain and improve the effectiveness of clinical workforce.1,2 For example, in medicine, there are commercially available ‘smart watches,’ equipped with sensors capable of providing important diagnostic information (electrocardiogram, temperature and blood pressure readings) to healthcare professionals and designed to encourage patients to manage their long-term medical conditions.

The development and implementation of cloud-based systems for interoperability and access to shared electronic patient and summary care records, electronic prescription services and electronic referral systems are already underway.3,4 There is also smartphone application (app) software, such as the NHS App, which can facilitate patient access to their clinical records, appointment booking systems and healthcare advice.4 This connected network and time-saving infrastructure for information exchange can help to ensure continuity of care and multidisciplinary co-operation, with minimal delays in diagnosis and treatment decision-making. In dentistry, data from ‘smart’ electric toothbrushes can be collected on tooth brushing habits, and apps may be used to encourage good oral care (eg My Dental Care), educate patients on dental conditions and treatment procedures, and monitor pain experience and treatment outcome.

An independent commission, sponsored by the Royal College of Surgeons of England, on the ‘Future of Surgery’ considered innovations in areas such as robot-assisted surgery, data analytics, artificial intelligence, genomics, regenerative medicine, and virtual and augmented reality.5 The published report covered the advances in medicine and technology that are likely to change surgical care in the next 20 years. However, the impact of these technological advances is not limited to surgery; it extends to many healthcare disciplines, including endodontics. Therefore, Part 2 of this article series explores advances in endodontic case-difficulty assessment and speculates on other future directions with the goal of meeting the challenges and improving the delivery of endodontic care.

Case-difficulty assessment tools

Endodontic treatment, like any healthcare procedure, is not risk-free. Inadequate instrumentation, insufficient disinfection and incomplete obturation of the root canal system may result in an unfavourable treatment outcome and persistence of disease. In addition, during delivery of endodontic treatment, instrument separation, perforation and other procedural errors may occur resulting in the need for re-treatment or even tooth loss.6,7,8,9,10 Such procedural errors may be influenced by the level of operator knowledge, skill and experience in managing variables in patient- and treatment-related prognostic factors.11,12,13,14,15,16

A recent study investigated the influence of case complexity on endodontic mishaps for undergraduate students using hand files or reciprocating engine-driven files and found that 31.9% of instrumented teeth had at least one procedural error, including over-instrumentation, loss of working length, short obturations, long obturations, canal transportation, instrument separation and strip perforations.17 There was a correlation between multiple endodontic mishaps and a high level of case complexity, irrespective of the instrumentation method (hand- or engine-driven). Thus, the level of difficulty was more important than the instrumentation method in determining the occurrence and frequency of endodontic mishaps. This reconfirmed that there may be a greater risk of procedural errors even when endodontic treatment challenges do match the operator's capabilities. Endodontic treatment, especially where challenging, may understandably be beyond the skill and experience of some operators.

The GDC's ‘Moving Upstream’,18 highlighted the ‘climate of fear’ faced by dental students and newly qualified dentists commencing their career, induced by pressures of patient complaints, litigation and the threat of the regulator. Against this background, not just the newly qualified, but every member of the dental team would benefit from assistance in assessing case complexity. Therefore, if there is a tool available to help assess the risks and difficulties of a particular case, the operator can then decide whether to undertake the treatment or, if necessary, refer it onwards for specialist management. When a case is correctly assessed and appropriately managed, it is more likely to lead to a favourable treatment outcome, and reduce the need for treatment revision, or even tooth loss. This translates into savings in terms of financial outlay, pain and suffering for patients.

Ree et al19 noted that general dental practitioners must be capable of determining the complexity of endodontic treatment and, to be able to refer patients onwards for management, specialist services must also be available. In the UK, despite the recognition of endodontics as a specialty, there are insufficient specialists to service the increasing endodontic treatment demands of patients. In an attempt to address the issue, the concept of dentists with extended skills/special interest in endodontics came into being. Dentists with extended skills/special interest in endodontics are general dental practitioners who have chosen to receive further training to provide enhanced endodontic services.20,21 Therefore, within the limits of their competency, they can accept referrals from dental colleagues, treat moderately complex cases, and refer more complicated cases for specialist management.21 However, any solution to meet the increasing number of endodontic treatment demands is still reliant on accurate determination of treatment complexity, to ensure an individual case is managed by an operator with the appropriate skill-set.

Web-based tools

Case-difficulty assessment tools can assist in determining the complexity of endodontic treatment through a cumulative and systematic risk analysis of important clinical and radiographic criteria, and their variables. Examples of case-difficulty assessment systems and forms include the following:

  • Restorative Dentistry Index of Treatment Need (RIOTN);22
  • University of California at San Francisco case selection system;23
  • Canadian Academy of Endodontists case-classification system;24
  • American Association of Endodontists (AAE) case assessment difficulty form;25
  • Dutch Endodontic Treatment Index (DETI) and Endodontic Treatment Classification (ETC) form.19
  • Although these systems and forms were designed to help ascertain the level of difficulty for individual cases and to suggest appropriate treatment delivery pathways, they have limitations. For example, reliance on a manual scoring system, terminology variances, and limited country-specific relevance regarding triage systems and referral pathways.26

    These limitations led to the development of a web-based, digital tool for case-difficulty assessment, EndoApp (Figure 1), which uses an automated scoring system, and generates score-based and relevant referral pathways recommendations depending on complexity level.26 Research on EndoApp has been carried out to assess usage times, user experience and relevance using simulated cases. The results showed that the average usage time was 67 seconds, demonstrating its efficiency, and the majority of users expressed favourable views on their user experience and the app's relevance.26 The potential application as an ‘educational tool’ and for ‘primary care triage’ were deemed the most popular features. Positive comments focused on its simplicity, ease of use, practicality, and comprehensiveness. Whereas comments and suggestions for improvement were aimed at refining the scoring system, modifying the flow structure, and incorporating additional features to manage referrals and record-keeping.

    Figure 1. Screenshots of EndoApp demonstrating an example of the interface and recommendation generated.

    Based on the above, a multi-centre study, comparing the educational potential of EndoApp and the AAE case-difficulty assessment form, was carried out on dental undergraduate students (n=206) from four dental schools.27 The participants' knowledge reinforcement regarding critical non-surgical root canal treatment complexity factors, agreement with the recommendation generated on management pathway, and preference were investigated.27 The results showed a clear preference for EndoApp (65%) compared with the AAE form (11%).27 Both methods demonstrated a significant increase in knowledge reinforcement; however, a greater level of agreement with the recommendation generated was reached with EndoApp than with the AAE form.27 Thus, for dental education purposes, EndoApp can help undergraduate dental students develop a better understanding of technical challenges in endodontics, such as complex root canal anatomy and treatment limitations, and improve decision-making skills for treatment planning. As a clinical teaching aid, EndoApp can be used to reinforce practical aspects of endodontic knowledge and nurture skill development.26,27

    Case-difficulty assessment tools also have other uses. In the publicly funded NHS, resources are limited, and an increased number of referrals equates to a corresponding pressure on secondary and tertiary care providers.28,29 Hence, for best use of resources, it is even more critical to accurately assess referred cases based on care-acceptance criteria and treatment urgency. Unfortunately, triaging still relies primarily on consultant- or specialist-grade staff going through each received referral, often on paper. Additionally, efforts to mitigate excessive demand for secondary and tertiary NHS care services has led to the development of a three-tier complexity classification system.21,30 Insufficient clarity, and a lack of consideration for compounding and risk factors, and/or inadequate comprehensiveness may also result in cases being wrongly assigned, for example, where a non-specialist struggles to manage a highly complex case, which was initially considered to be relatively easy. The use of EndoApp for digital triaging could help to overcome such issues. The criteria for acceptance can be tailored according to care service availability and competency, and incorporated into EndoApp's algorithm. Referral triaging could then become automated, and the reliance on consultant- or specialist-grade staff input would no longer be essential. There would also be no delay in being advised whether the referral would be accepted for further assessment and, hopefully, treatment. It is envisaged that general dental practitioners wishing to refer an endodontic case could directly access a secure online portal to use EndoApp and upload any relevant images of the case. The automated process generates the appropriate response, without unnecessary delay and providing there is linkage between systems, appointments and treatment could be offered. There is also the potential, through machine learning for such a triaging system to become ‘smarter’. Therefore, EndoApp has the potential to help deliver more cost-efficient and seamless endodontic care services at all levels through accurate assessment, speedy filtration and appropriate diversion of referrals.26 This would also help reduce overall waiting times and unnecessary distress for patients.

    As a case-difficulty assessment tool, EndoApp could also have a role in overall dento-legal risk management. Currently in the UK, there are no restrictions on the type or level of difficulty of cases dentists can undertake. However, this may change considering the unremitting and exponential increase in dental litigation.31 The GDC has published guidance on scope of practice32 and the standards expected33 from dental professionals. Core ethical principles that a GDC-registered dental professional must uphold at all times include:

  • Putting patients' interests first;
  • Working with colleagues in a way that is in patients' best interests;
  • Practising within the limits of individual competences and abilities.
  • EndoApp can help dentists to uphold these core ethical principles by assisting in the determination of case complexity and sign-posting the likely challenges for an individual case. Dentists can then practise within the limits of their individual competences and abilities, and, where necessary, refer cases onwards for management, thereby working in collaboration with colleagues and putting patients' interests first.

    With the ubiquitous availability of mobile internet services and the popularity of smartphone and related devices, a smartphone version of EndoApp is under development.26,27 This version would provide a simple, quick and interactive questionnaire, automatically deducing the level of difficulty, and generating corresponding recommendations. It would be a more practical, user-friendly application and, potentially, revolutionize endodontic case-difficulty assessment.

    The app would be capable of operating across multiple platforms and devices, facilitating paperless access, and be more easily distributed, maintained and updated. Planned functionality improvements include automatic determination of the angle of root curvatures and lengths and linkage to location-based referral services – potentially providing a seamless pathway from assessment to referral. Furthermore, artificial intelligence integration is planned to permit various automated features, including deep analysis of radiographic images for detection of root canal outlines, quantity and quality of root-fillings, type of coronal restoration, intelligent management of referrals and related correspondence, and treatment-outcome monitoring.

    Future perspectives

    ‘Prediction is very difficult, especially about the future’ is a quote attributed to Niels Bohr, the Danish physicist and Nobel Prize winner. Nevertheless, further technological developments are on the horizon and innovations based on, for example, virtual, augmented and mixed reality, artificial intelligence and robotics are anticipated. They all have potential applications in endodontics.

    Virtual, augmented and mixed-reality endodontics

    There are differences between virtual, augmented and mixed reality.34 Virtual reality (VR) is a fully immersive virtual-only experience. All visual input from the surrounding environment is blocked out, and the ‘real world’ is shut out altogether. It has been used, for example, in simulation-based training. Augmented reality (AR) overlays real-world content with computer-generated content. This superimposed digital overlay can only interact superficially in real-time with the surrounding environment; for example, viewing a patient's laboratory results or scans while operating. Mixed reality (MR) projects spatially aware and responsive 3D digital content that interacts with the surrounding environment. With MR, virtual objects become part of, and interact with, the real world. For example, superimposing scans can be superimposed onto a patient's body during surgery, and similarly, this could be applied to endodontics (Figure 2).

    Figure 2. Key concepts and applications of virtual, augmented and mixed-reality technologies, to help with treatment planning for a maxillary right central incisor with pulp canal obliteration.

    In dentistry, AR in implant surgery was investigated using a video projector system, synchronized with a dynamic implant guidance system, to accurately overlay 3D radiographic images over the surgical site.35 The high precision was verified by simulating implant osteotomies on plaster models before using the technique on a volunteer patient. The position and movements of the patient were constantly tracked using an optical camera and matched with the projected image using tracking markers attached to the teeth.

    In a later study,36 motion parallax of the patient with the 3D radiographic image projection was maintained using the contours of the teeth as references and tracking markers. This AR technique permits accurate visualization and direct guidance, without reliance on computer display monitors. However, at the time of writing, the equipment may be too cumbersome for everyday clinical practice. Other AR techniques, which use head-mounted stereo video devices, or the projection of high-intensity guidance light beams, have been described for use in oral and maxillofacial, implant, and trauma surgery, to improve accuracy of surgery and/or visualization of hidden anatomical structures.37,38,39

    In non-surgical root canal treatment, software for use with AR has already been investigated for real-time automated canal location.40 This software relied on images obtained from a camera and algorithms encoding the ‘laws of pulp chamber anatomy’41 for canal location. However, 2D images were still used, which change with different camera angles, resulting in difficulties in accurately detecting pulp chamber anatomy. Furthermore, extensive coronal destruction was required to prepare access cavities in order to permit capture of pulp floor features in their entirety. This problem may be overcome using AR technology with matched 3D imaging data, which offers the possibility of pre-operative canal location planning, thereby minimizing the unnecessary loss of tooth tissue.

    For apical surgery, the identification of surgical landmarks and real-time monitoring of surgical instruments may be used for educational and clinical training purposes. Such guidance systems might be useful for flap design, creating precise osteotomies and root-end resections, especially in cases where the root-end is in close approximation to critical anatomical structures. Another possibility is the integration of AR with the dental operating microscope42 enabling some form of data overlay system rather than images being displayed on a computer monitor. This would allow for direct visualization, reducing the risk of mishaps without compromising accuracy when executing procedures.

    There are many AR and MR consumer technology devices under development. These are increasingly being adapted for healthcare use.43,44 Treatment planned on a virtual patient and based on 3D imaging data can be directly projected or superimposed onto the patient to provide guidance on operative procedures. The first-ever globally live-streamed surgical procedure was conducted using Google Glass, an AR system developed by Google (Alphabet Inc, Mountain View, CA, USA).45

    Based on a similar concept for application in endodontics, 3D imaging data acquired from a CBCT scan and the resultant treatment plan may be overlaid onto a tooth. Advanced light-weight hologram lenses that support MR (eg Microsoft's HoloLens 2; Microsoft, Redmond, WA, USA; Figure 3) may provide an untethered solution for visualizing superimposed 3D holographic anatomy and pre-planned guidance to allow easy and intuitive interaction to dynamically guide non-surgical root canal treatment and apical surgery.

    Figure 3. The mixed-reality HoloLens 2 device (Microsoft, Redmond, WA, USA).

    Complicated cases requiring non-surgical root canal treatment or apical surgery are more routinely encountered in specialist practices. They can be challenging for most operators, and are less frequently performed in public health service systems such as the NHS.12 Furthermore, a reduction in the frequency of apical surgery, due to successful management by non-surgical re-treatment approaches, increased tooth replacement with implants, and a rise in dento-legal litigation46,47,48 may contribute to operator skill erosion and insufficient training opportunities.49 Therefore, an MR device may also benefit the practitioner's skill and learning needs. Connectivity and portability of these devices, and wide availability of peripheral devices (such as smart phones and tablets) may also permit effective distance-learning and mentoring.

    Artificial intelligence, robotics and tele-endodontics

    Artificial intelligence (AI), by mimicking human cognitive function, allows machines to learn. By accurately interpreting cumulative learning, AI machines can flexibly adapt and be used to perform specific tasks, for example, dental charting,50,51 caries detection,52 and bone loss.53 In endodontics, a recent study demonstrated the high reliability of AI in the detection of periapical lesions on CBCT images compared to human observation.54 Machine learning is an application of AI in which computer systems can access data and automatically learn and improve from experience without being explicitly programmed. When incorporated into a digital case-difficulty assessment tool, such as EndoApp, machine learning will enable it to be refined, becoming increasingly more accurate and efficient.

    Robotics, technology in which machines are designed and used to undertake precise, repetitive and pre-set procedures, have been hailed as the next Industrial Revolution. In medicine, the extent of the uptake of robotics has been unprecedented, with many surgical specialties adopting the technology.55,56

    Advances in AI and robotics have, therefore, the potential to lead to the development of automated systems capable of analysing the complexity of non-surgical root canal treatments, planning the treatment independently or interactively, and performing the labour-intensive treatment stages, such as access cavity preparation, chemo-mechanical preparation and/or disinfection, or the complete treatment. This may help reduce excessive loss of tooth structure,57 optimize the shaping and disinfection of the root canal system, and limit procedural errors, such as instrument separation, canal ledging and transportation, root perforation and debris extrusion.

    Telemedicine can be defined as ‘the delivery of healthcare services, where distance is a critical factor, by all healthcare professionals using information and communication technologies for the exchange of valid information for diagnosis, treatment and prevention of disease and injuries, research and evaluation, and for the continuing education of health care providers, all in the interests of advancing the health of individuals and their communities'.58 The convergence of complimentary digital technologies may see the emergence of telemedicine concepts being applied to endodontics, whereby an endodontist using video-conferencing technology plans and guides an online-connected robotic system to perform the treatment remotely. The implications of such a convergence include improved availability of endodontic services, regardless of location, and all patients could receive similar access and levels of care. Such a convergence would also have valuable applications in dental education, training and continual professional development.

    Although attempts have been made to develop robotic technology in endodontics,57 variations in treatment complexity and patient factors are, presently, major technical challenges to overcome. Further investment, research and development is needed to realize the ambition of introducing robotics into everyday endodontic practice.

    Conclusions

    Technological advances have permeated every aspect of society. Judiciously adopted and appropriately used in patient-centred healthcare, they have the potential to change lives. The selected technological innovations in endodontics that have been described can contribute and facilitate the assessment, management and treatment of challenging endodontic cases in clinical practice; ultimately improving treatment outcomes and patient care.