ArticleJournal of dental sciences2017
Analyses of anatomical relationship between mandibular third molar roots and variations in lingual undercut of mandible using cone-beam computed tomography.
Article in Journal of dental sciences, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Lingual plate thickness influences cortical bone injury during lower third molar extraction: A cone beam computed tomography study.Oral and maxillofacial surgery · 2025Article
- The mylohyoid line is highly variable but does not affect the microarchitecture of the edentulous alveolar bone - an anatomical micro-CT study.BMC oral health · 2024Article
- Risk factors for impacted lower third molar root perforation through the undercut-shaped lingual plate: preoperative insights from panoramic radiography.Odontology · 2024Article
- Proximity of mandibular third molar root(s) to surrounding cortical bone: cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and panoramic findings.Oral and maxillofacial surgery · 2022Article
- Cone beam computed tomographic analysis of the spatial limitation during mandibular arch distalization.BMC medical imaging · 2020Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background/purposeAnatomical features of the lingual undercut region is a potential factor that might increase the risk of displacement of a tooth or fragment. The aim of this study was to report the normal anatomical relationship of impacted lower third molar roots to the lingual cortex and soft tissues of mandible and anatomical variations of lingual balcony in the impacted third molar region. MATERIALS AND
methodsOne hundred impacted third molars (54 males, 46 females) from 65 (31 men, 34 women) patients were evaluated for this study using cone-beam computed tomography. Three measurements [bone thickness, angle (Ang) 1 and Ang 2] were recorded on the coronal section slices of cone-beam computed tomography images; in these images, the impacted third molar root was closest to the lingual soft tissues.
resultsThe average distance between the tooth root and the lingual outer cortical bone layer (bone thickness) was 1.03 mm. The averages of Ang 1 and Ang 2 were 140.61° and 153.44°. Ang 1 and Ang 2 of female patients were larger than those of male patients.
conclusionThe narrow angulation of the lingual balcony region and the relationship between roots and lingual soft tissues should be noted to avoid undesirable complication of displacement of a tooth or fragment into sublingual, submandibular, and pterygomandibular spaces. There was no relation in the floor of the mouth between the position of the impacted third molar roots and different lingual undercut angulation variations.
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.