ArticleClinical oral investigations2017
Presence of root canal treatment has no influence on periodontal bone loss.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 2017. 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of endodontic post material on longitudinal changes in interproximal bone level: a randomized controlled pilot trial.Clinical oral investigations · 2019Trial
- A Cone Beam CT Study on the Correlation between Crestal Bone Loss and Periapical Disease.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Impact of simulated reduced alveolar bone support, increased tooth mobility, and distal post-supported, root-treated abutment tooth on load capability of all-ceramic zirconia-supported cantilever FDP.Clinical oral investigations · 2018Article
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 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimThe aim of this study was to compare the interproximal bone level at root canal-filled teeth and non-root canal-filled teeth. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe records of patients from the department were consecutively screened from January 2009 to October 2011. The distance between the coronal reference point to the alveolar bone crest (AC) was assessed at the mesial and distal aspects of root canal-filled teeth (RCF+) and their contralateral non-root canal-filled teeth (RCF-) on periapical radiographs. Generalised linear mixed-effects models were applied.
resultsThe sample consisted of 128 pairs of teeth comprising data from 72 patients. The results for AC revealed a median distance of 3.2 mm for RCF+ and 3.4 mm for RCF- (p = 0.61). Using the maximal distance on either the distal or the mesial tooth surface, a median distance of 3.6 mm was detected for RCF+ and 3.8 mm for RCF-, respectively (p = 0.42). Even after taking several tooth- and subject-specific variables into account, the differences between AC on RCF+ and RCF- were statistically not significant (p > 0.05).
conclusionThe interproximal bone loss did not differ statistically significant between root canal-filled teeth and non-root canal-filled teeth. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Existence of appropriately done root canal fillings in periodontitis patients has no effect on the prognosis of periodontal disease.
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.