The dental professional should be familiar with the differences of number of root and root canal system anatomy, which at some aspects provides specific dental anomalies of tooth and helpful in analysing in the clinical field. The main aim for patients and doctors is to relive pain and maintain natural teeth with similar morphology. Root canal therapy is mostly the treatment of choice for teeth with pulpal and periradicular affected teeth. Effective treatment is required for good mechanical and chemical cleaning and shaping and provides a compact obturation under aseptic conditions with an inert filling material.The major reason for endodontic failure is the existence of untreated canals. A detailed diagnosis of the root canal system anatomy is a requirement for effective treatment of root canals. This review shows incidence of root and root canal variations in maxillary second molars. The presence of root canal orifices helps in diagnosis of preoperative radiographs and examination of the pulp.

Composite resins are a class of advanced and very well prevailing conventional restorative material. They can be used in both anterior and posterior restorations. Composites have their own indications and allusion in anterior and posterior teeth for restoration. The choices of aspired dental composite keeps changing along with the evolution of dental composites, for example, the development of smaller particle size, improved bonding system, curing refinements and sealing systems. This article solely focuses on identifying the most preferred composite material for anterior and posterior restorations. The aim of this study is to conduct a survey among many PG dental students and PG graduated dental practitioners from Chennai and then to analyse their choices and preferences in using different composite materials for anterior and posterior restorations in restorative dental therapy. A total number of 109 PG dental students and PG graduated dental practitioners took part in this survey. A questionnaire containing 15 questions was distributed through an online platform called Google Forms. The results were then collected and statistically analysed through SPSS software. Among the total participants who attended this survey, 55.96% were PG dental students and the remaining 44.04% were dental PG graduated dental practitioners from Chennai. Most of them preferred hybrid composite for anterior restoration. Majority of them seemed to think amalgam restorations to be easier for posterior restoration. A comparison between dentists with various qualifications on different light activation methods, preferences on composite materials for restoration, easily usable restorative materials and preferences of composite materials for posterior restoration was done (Chi-square analysis). It was found that there is no statistically significant difference (p-value >0.05) between the postgraduate students and dental practitioners on the composite preferences and its usage. From this survey it's evident that PG dental students and PG graduated dental practitioners prefer hybrid composite for anterior restoration and find amalgam restoration to be preferred for posterior restorations.