Instrument separation is a critical complication during root canal therapy, impacting treatment success and long-term tooth preservation. The etiology of instrument separation is multifactorial, involving the intricate anatomy of the root canal system, instrument-related factors, and instrumentation techniques. Instrument separation can hinder thorough cleaning, shaping, and obturation of the root canal, posing challenges to successful treatment outcomes. Although retrieval of separated instrument is often feasible, it carries risks including perforation, excessive removal of tooth structure and root fractures. Effective management of separated instruments requires a comprehensive understanding of the contributing factors, meticulous preoperative assessment, and precise evaluation of the retrieval difficulty. The application of appropriate retrieval techniques is essential to minimize complications and optimize clinical outcomes. The current manuscript provides a framework for understanding the causes, risk factors, and clinical management principles of instrument separation. By integrating effective strategies, endodontists can enhance decision-making, improve endodontic treatment success and ensure the preservation of natural dentition.
Humans ; Root Canal Therapy/adverse effects* ; Consensus ; Root Canal Preparation/adverse effects*

BACKGROUNDColorectal serrated polyp is considered as histologically heterogeneous lesions with malignant potential in western countries. However, few Asian studies have investigated the comprehensive clinical features of serrated polyps in symptomatic populations. The aim of the study was to evaluate the features of colorectal serrated polyps in a Chinese symptomatic population.

METHODSData from all consecutive symptomatic patients were documented from a large colonoscopy database and were analyzed. Chi-square test or Fisher's exact test and logistic regression analysis were used for the data processing.

RESULTSA total of 9191 (31.7%) patients were detected with at least one colorectal polyp. The prevalence of serrated polyps was 0.53% (153/28,981). The proportions of hyperplastic polyp (HP), sessile serrated adenoma/polyp (SSA/P), and traditional serrated adenoma (TSA) of all serrated polyps were 41.2%, 7.2%, and 51.6%, respectively, which showed a lower proportion of HP and SSA/P and a higher proportion of TSA. Serrated polyps appeared more in males and elder patients while there was no significant difference in the subtype distribution in gender and age. The proportions of large and proximal serrated polyps were 13.7% (21/153) and 46.4% (71/153), respectively. In total, 98.9% (89/90) serrated adenomas were found with dysplasia. Moreover, 14 patients with serrated polyps were found with synchronous advanced colorectal neoplasia, and large serrated polyps (LSPs) (odds ratio: 3.446, 95% confidence interval: 1.010-11.750, P < 0.05), especially large HPs, might have an association with synchronous advanced neoplasia (AN).

CONCLUSIONSThe overall detection rate of colorectal serrated polyps in Chinese symptomatic patient population was low, and distribution pattern of three subtypes is different from previous reports. Moreover, LSPs, especially large HPs, might be associated with an increased risk of synchronous AN.

Adult ; Age Distribution ; Aged ; Chi-Square Distribution ; Colonic Neoplasms ; diagnosis ; epidemiology ; Colonoscopy ; Colorectal Neoplasms ; diagnosis ; epidemiology ; Female ; Humans ; Logistic Models ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Prevalence