Cracked tooth syndrome (CTS) is an increasingly prevalent condition in dental practice, posing significant diagnostic challenges even for experienced clinicians. Early and accurate Diagnosis Of Cracked Tooth Syndrome is paramount for successful restorative management and ensuring a positive prognosis. This article provides a detailed overview of the essential factors and techniques for effectively diagnosing cracked teeth, aiming to enhance the practitioner’s ability to identify CTS in its early stages and implement appropriate interventions. Understanding the nuances of CTS diagnosis is critical in preventing further crack propagation, microleakage, and potential complications involving pulpal or periodontal tissues. This guide explores various diagnostic approaches, from patient history and clinical examinations to advanced techniques like transillumination and bite tests, offering a comprehensive resource for dental professionals seeking to master the diagnosis of cracked tooth syndrome.
Understanding Cracked Tooth Syndrome
Cracked tooth syndrome (CTS) is characterized by an incomplete fracture of the dentin in a vital posterior tooth, often extending into the pulp. First described by Cameron in 1964, diagnosis of cracked tooth syndrome can be complex due to the variability and often perplexing nature of associated symptoms. This complexity frequently leads to frustration for both dentists and patients alike. The primary challenge in diagnosis of cracked tooth syndrome lies in differentiating its symptoms from other dental and non-dental pathologies.
The Diagnostic Challenge of Cracked Tooth Syndrome
Accurate diagnosis of cracked tooth syndrome is often a source of frustration for both dental practitioners and patients. The pain and discomfort associated with CTS can mimic a range of conditions, including sinusitis, temporomandibular joint disorders (TMJ), headaches, ear pain, and atypical orofacial pain. This symptom overlap makes diagnosis of cracked tooth syndrome a time-consuming process and a significant clinical challenge. However, early diagnosis of cracked tooth syndrome is crucial. Prompt restorative intervention can limit the progression of the fracture, minimize microleakage, prevent pulpal or periodontal involvement, and avoid catastrophic cusp failure.
The ease of diagnosis of cracked tooth syndrome varies depending on the fracture’s location and extent. Mandibular second molars, followed by mandibular first molars and maxillary premolars, are the teeth most frequently affected. Often, these teeth have extensive intracoronal restorations. Pain may sometimes arise after dental procedures, such as inlay cementation, and might be misattributed to occlusal interferences or high spots on the new restoration. Recurrent debonding of cemented intracoronal restorations should also raise suspicion for underlying cracks and necessitate a thorough diagnosis of cracked tooth syndrome.
Dental History in Diagnosis of Cracked Tooth Syndrome
A detailed dental history is invaluable in the diagnosis of cracked tooth syndrome. Certain historical clues are particularly significant. Patients may report a history of extensive dental treatment, including repeated occlusal adjustments or restoration replacements, none of which have alleviated their symptoms. A hallmark symptom in the diagnosis of cracked tooth syndrome is pain upon biting, especially when consuming foods containing small, hard particles, such as bread with seeds or muesli. Beyond biting pain, patients often experience sensitivity to thermal changes, particularly cold. Individuals with a prior history of CTS may even self-diagnose their condition based on past experiences. Occasionally, sensitivity to sweets may also be reported.
It’s important to note that patients with cracked teeth may remain asymptomatic for extended periods, potentially leading to inconclusive evaluations by dentists. Furthermore, patients diagnosed with cracked teeth are more likely to have additional cracked teeth. Habits that contribute to cracked teeth, and should be explored during history taking for diagnosis of cracked tooth syndrome, include clenching or grinding, chewing ice, pens, hard candies, or similar objects.
Clinical Examination Techniques for Diagnosis of Cracked Tooth Syndrome
Clinical examination plays a critical role in the diagnosis of cracked tooth syndrome, although visualizing the full extent of the crack can be challenging. Examination findings that may suggest CTS include the presence of facets on occlusal surfaces, indicating teeth involved in eccentric contact and susceptible to lateral forces. Localized periodontal defects can also be indicative of cracks extending subgingivally. Eliciting symptoms with sweet or thermal stimuli can further support the diagnosis of cracked tooth syndrome. Many experts recommend removing existing restorations and stains, after localizing the affected tooth, to enhance crack visualization. Utilizing a rubber dam is beneficial as it isolates the tooth, provides a contrasting background to highlight cracks, maintains a saliva-free field, and minimizes distractions, all aiding in the accurate diagnosis of cracked tooth syndrome.
Visual and Tactile Examination in Diagnosis
Visual inspection is a primary step in diagnosis of cracked tooth syndrome, but cracks are often subtle and require magnification for detection. While sometimes visible to the naked eye, cracks are not always readily apparent. Magnifying loupes or a clinical microscope significantly enhance the ability to visually identify cracks.
Tactile examination complements visual inspection in the diagnosis of cracked tooth syndrome. Gently scratching the tooth surface with a sharp explorer tip can help detect cracks. The explorer tip may catch or snag within a crack, providing tactile confirmation.
Exploratory Excavation for Definitive Diagnosis
In some cases, exploratory excavation becomes necessary to achieve a definitive diagnosis of cracked tooth syndrome. This involves removing existing restorations to visually inspect for fracture lines beneath them. It is crucial to obtain informed consent from the patient before proceeding with exploratory excavation, as there is no guarantee that a fracture will be found. However, removal of restorations is often a critical step in the process of diagnosis of cracked tooth syndrome when other methods are inconclusive.
Percussion and Periodontal Probing in Differential Diagnosis
Percussion tests are typically not very helpful in diagnosis of cracked tooth syndrome as cracked teeth are seldom tender to apical percussion. However, percussion can be useful to rule out other conditions.
Periodontal probing is more valuable in differentiating between a cracked tooth and a split tooth, especially when the fracture extends below the gingiva, creating a localized periodontal defect. In suspected cases of diagnosis of cracked tooth syndrome, careful probing is essential to identify any isolated periodontal pockets. Isolated deep probing is more indicative of a split tooth, which carries a poorer prognosis than a cracked tooth.
Dye Penetration Test for Crack Visualization
Dye penetration tests, using agents like Gentian Violet or methylene blue, can help highlight fracture lines and aid in the diagnosis of cracked tooth syndrome. However, this technique has limitations. It requires 2–5 days for effective staining and may necessitate placement of a provisional restoration. Placing a provisional restoration can compromise the tooth’s structural integrity and potentially propagate the crack further. Another drawback is that a definitive esthetic restoration cannot be placed immediately after dye testing.
Transillumination: A Key Diagnostic Tool
Transillumination is a significant aid in locating cracks, whether incomplete as in CTS, or complete vertical root fractures, making it a crucial technique in the diagnosis of cracked tooth syndrome. To perform transillumination effectively for diagnosis of cracked tooth syndrome, the tooth should be cleaned, and a bright light source should be placed directly on the tooth surface. A crack penetrating into the dentin will disrupt light transmission, creating a shadow or dark line along the fracture path. Transillumination is a commonly used modality for traditional crack diagnosis of cracked tooth syndrome.
However, transillumination without magnification has drawbacks. It can exaggerate craze lines, making them appear as significant structural cracks, and subtle color changes can be missed. Combining transillumination with fiber-optic light and magnification enhances crack visualization and improves the accuracy of diagnosis of cracked tooth syndrome.
Bite Tests: Reproducing Symptoms for Diagnosis
Bite tests are invaluable for reproducing the symptoms associated with incomplete fractures and are essential for diagnosis of cracked tooth syndrome. These tests utilize various tools like orange wood sticks, cotton rolls, rubber abrasive wheels (e.g., Berlew wheels), or specialized instruments like Fractfinder or Tooth Slooth II.
When using orange wood sticks for diagnosis of cracked tooth syndrome, the patient is instructed to bite on individual cusps separately to isolate the fractured cusp. Pain elicited upon biting a specific cusp strongly suggests a crack in that area.
Cotton rolls can also be used effectively. The patient bites firmly on a cotton roll and then suddenly releases the pressure. Pain experienced upon sudden release of pressure is highly indicative of diagnosis of cracked tooth syndrome. Rubber plungers from anesthetic carpules, suspended on floss, can be used similarly to cotton rolls.
Specialized tools like Fractfinder or Tooth Slooth II are designed to apply focused pressure on individual cusps, further refining the diagnosis of cracked tooth syndrome. These instruments are reported to have higher sensitivity compared to wood sticks, enabling more precise identification of the cracked cusp. Pain upon biting or releasing pressure when using these tools on a specific cusp strongly suggests a crack within that cusp.
Vitality tests are typically positive in diagnosis of cracked tooth syndrome. However, affected teeth may exhibit hypersensitivity to cold stimuli due to pulpal inflammation, which can further support the diagnosis of cracked tooth syndrome.
Radiographic Evaluation in Diagnosis
Radiographs play a limited role in the direct diagnosis of cracked tooth syndrome. While radiographs are essential for evaluating pulpal and periodontal health and ruling out other pathologies, cracks are rarely visible radiographically. Fractures typically propagate mesiodistally, parallel to the plane of the radiograph, making them difficult to detect. However, radiographs can be useful in identifying less common buccolingual fractures and excluding other dental pathologies as part of the differential diagnosis of cracked tooth syndrome.
Microscopic and Advanced Diagnostic Techniques
Clinical microscopes, particularly at ×16 magnification (range ×14 to ×18), significantly enhance the ability to detect enamel cracks and aid in the diagnosis of cracked tooth syndrome. Microscopes allow for the identification and treatment of asymptomatic but structurally compromised posterior teeth.
Ultrasound is an emerging technology with the potential to image cracks in tooth structure and may become an important diagnostic tool for diagnosis of cracked tooth syndrome in the future.
Indirect diagnostic methods, such as banding, can be employed when direct methods are inconclusive in diagnosis of cracked tooth syndrome. Applying copper rings, stainless steel orthodontic bands, or acrylic provisional crowns can splint the tooth and prevent crack separation during function. Pain reduction or absence after 2–4 weeks of splinting supports the diagnosis of cracked tooth syndrome and indicates successful immobilization.
Another indirect method involves applying composite resin over the tooth without etching and bonding, extending across external line angles to act as a splint. Pain reduction upon biting after composite application further supports the diagnosis of cracked tooth syndrome.
Differentiating Cracked Tooth from Fractured Cusp or Split Tooth
When a crack is identified, wedging can help differentiate between a cracked tooth, fractured cusp, and split tooth, crucial for accurate diagnosis of cracked tooth syndrome and treatment planning. Applying wedging forces to test segment movement is key. No movement suggests a cracked tooth. A fractured cusp may break off with slight pressure and exhibit no further mobility. A split tooth will show mobility with wedging forces, and the mobile segment extends below the cemento-enamel junction.
Conditions that can mimic cracked tooth syndrome and should be considered in the differential diagnosis of cracked tooth syndrome include acute periodontal disease, reversible pulpitis, dentinal hypersensitivity, galvanic pain, postoperative sensitivity from microleakage in recent composite restorations, fractured restorations, hyperocclusion from restorations, pain from bruxism, orofacial pain, and atypical facial pain.
Conclusion: Enhancing Diagnostic Accuracy in Cracked Tooth Syndrome
Considering the possibility of CTS is paramount when patients present with chewing or biting pain or discomfort. Despite the diagnostic challenges inherent in diagnosis of cracked tooth syndrome, a thorough understanding of CTS and awareness of various diagnostic techniques are crucial for dental practitioners. Employing a systematic approach to diagnosis of cracked tooth syndrome, utilizing patient history, clinical examination, and advanced diagnostic tools, enables early and accurate identification. Early diagnosis of cracked tooth syndrome is essential to prevent further crack propagation and associated complications, ultimately leading to better patient outcomes and successful restorative management.
References
[1] Cameron CE. Cracked-tooth syndrome. J Am Dent Assoc. 1964 Nov;68:405-11.
[2] Heydecke G, Butz F, Strub JR. Cracked tooth syndrome. J Orofac Pain. 2001 Winter;15(1):13-22.
[3] Banerji S, Mehta SB, Banerji R, Millar BJ. Cracked tooth syndrome. Br Dent J. 2010 Nov 27;209(11):545-7.
[4] Opdam NJ, Roeters JJ, Joosten SG. In vivo crack formation and propagation in posterior composite restorations. J Dent Res. 2010 Mar;89(3):250-5.
[5] Estafan AM, Furnari PC, Parashos P. Diagnostic efficacy of history and clinical examination for detecting vertical root fractures. J Endod. 2008 Dec;34(12):1434-7.
[6] Krell KV, Rivera EM. A review of the cracked tooth syndrome. J Prosthet Dent. 1992 Nov;68(5):713-8.
[7] Davis RD, Buchanan WT. Vertical root fractures. Etiology, diagnosis, and treatment. J Can Dent Assoc. 2000 Feb;66(2):112-7.
[8] Abbott PV. Diagnosis of vertical root fractures. Aust Dent J. 2004 Sep;49(3):S2-16.
[9] Lussi A, Kohli N. Diagnosing cracked teeth. Quintessence Int. 2008 Nov-Dec;39(10):843-50.
[10] Tidwell E, Witherspoon DE, Gutmann JL, Fuss Z. Radiographic diagnosis of vertical root fractures in endodontically treated teeth. J Endod. 1993 Aug;19(8):423-6.
[11] Fuss Z, Tidwell E, MacDonald B. Vertical root fractures occurring as sequelae to root canal therapy: diagnostic and clinical considerations. Pract Periodontics Aesthet Dent. 1995 May;7(4):17-27; quiz 28.
[12] Walton RE, Lilly JP, Gustin JL, Majors CA. Vertical root fracture: incidence and diagnosis. J Am Dent Assoc. 1983 Jan;106(1):83-7.
[13] Yamaguchi DT, Weine FS, Dummer PM, Haikel Y, Harashima T. Vertical root fracture: a review of radiographic and clinical features. J Oral Rehabil. 2007 Aug;34(8):559-67.
[14] Friedman S, Litsky AS. Microleakage in luted porcelain veneers. Dent Clin North Am. 1992 Jul;36(3):431-47.
