ArticleInternational journal of legal medicine2015
Fatal visit to the dentist.
Article in International journal of legal medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Late mandibular fracture after third molar extraction: a malpractice case or not?The Journal of forensic odonto-stomatology · 2025Article
- Using Nonexpert Online Reports to Enhance Expert Knowledge About Causes of Death in Dental Offices Reported in Scientific Publications: Qualitative and Quantitative Content Analysis and Search Engine Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2020Article
- An approach to iatrogenic deaths.Forensic science, medicine, and pathology · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A 23-year-old woman was mortally afraid of dental interventions and decided to have her four wisdom teeth removed by outpatient surgery under endotracheal anaesthesia. According to the files, the patient was categorized as ASA I and Mallampati II, and surgery was considered an elective routine intervention. Soon after initiation of anaesthesia, O2 saturation and blood pressure dropped, and the young woman died shortly afterwards in spite of immediate resuscitation measures. At first, an allergic reaction to succinylcholine, which had been administered as a muscle relaxant, was suspected. Autopsy and histological examination showed haemorrhagic pulmonary oedema and a defined lesion in the midportion of the oesophageal mucosa in spite of correct placement of the endotracheal breathing tube. Ultimately, misintubation into the oesophagus, which had not been noticed at first, was determined as cause of death.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.