Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32030659›Full record

ArticleOral radiology2021

Odontogenic keratocyst and ameloblastoma: radiographic evaluation.

Jira Kitisubkanchana, Nor Hidayah Reduwan, Sopee Poomsawat, Suchaya Pornprasertsuk-Damrongsri, Chanchai Wongchuensoontorn

Erratum issuedAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Oral radiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 33 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
7.8field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

33 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 65 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Characteristics of impacted mandibular third molar-related lesions.Journal of the Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons · 2024
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Jira KitisubkanchanaDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Faculty of Dentistry, Mahidol University, No. 6, Yothi Road, Ratchathewi District, Bangkok, 10400, Thailand. yjira@hotmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0020-863X
Nor Hidayah ReduwanFaculty of Dentistry, Centre of Oral and Maxillofacial Diagnostic and Medicine Studies, Universiti Teknologi Mara, Sungai Buloh Campus, Shah Alam, Malaysia.
Sopee PoomsawatDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Pathology, Faculty of Dentistry, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Suchaya Pornprasertsuk-DamrongsriDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Faculty of Dentistry, Mahidol University, No. 6, Yothi Road, Ratchathewi District, Bangkok, 10400, Thailand.
Chanchai WongchuensoontornDepartment of Surgery and Oral Medicine, Faculty of Dentistry, Srinakharinwirot University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Mahidol University · THSrinakharinwirot University · THUniversiti Teknologi MARA · MY

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo describe the radiographic features of odontogenic keratocysts (OKCs) and ameloblastomas and to compare the radiographic findings between these 2 lesions.

methodsRadiographs of OKCs and ameloblastomas were retrospectively reviewed. Location, border, shape, association with impacted tooth, tooth displacement, root resorption, and bone expansion were evaluated. Chi-squared or Fisher's exact tests were used for statistical analysis. A p value < 0.05 was considered to indicate statistical significance.

resultsOne hundred OKCs and 101 ameloblastomas were reviewed. The ratios of maxilla to mandible were 1:1.4 and 1:9.1 in OKCs and ameloblastomas, respectively. All evaluated features significantly differed between OKCs and ameloblastomas (p ≤ 0.001). Most OKCs showed smooth border (60%) and unilocular shape (82%), while most ameloblastomas showed scalloped border (77.2%) and multilocular shape (68.3%). Association with impacted tooth was found in 47% of OKCs and 18.8% of ameloblastomas. Adjacent tooth displacement was found in 33.7% of OKCs and 55.8% of ameloblastomas. Root resorption was more common in ameloblastomas (66.7%) than in OKCs (7%). Bone expansion was also more common in ameloblastomas (96.3%) than in OKCs (63.6%).

conclusionA unilocular radiolucent lesion with smooth border, no adjacent tooth displacement, no root resorption and causing mild or no bone expansion is suggestive of an OKC rather than an ameloblastoma.

Indexed as

AmeloblastomaJaw NeoplasmsOdontogenic CystsOdontogenic TumorsHumansRetrospective StudiesAmeloblastomaDifferential diagnosisOdontogenic keratocyst

Identifiers

PMID32030659
OpenAlexW3004959084

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.