ArticleJournal of clinical and experimental dentistry2021
Article in Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic efficacy of cone-beam computed tomography for detection of vertical root fractures in endodontically treated teeth: a systematic review.BMC medical imaging · 2023Pooled it
- Evaluation the stress distribution in root canals by 3D finite element analysis after the materials used in reattaching the vertically root fractured fragments.Brazilian dental journal · 2024Article
- Development and validation of a method for creating incomplete vertical root fracture in extracted teeth.Odontology · 2023Article
- Vertical root fractures: A time-dependent clinical condition. A case-control study in two colombian populations.Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry · 2021Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed: (a) to determine the diagnostic performance of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) for detection of vertical root fractures (VRFs); (b) to evaluate the predictive value of diagnostic criteria regarding the definition of VRFs; and (c) to examine the robustness of the association of patient-, tooth-, and treatment-related variables with VRFs. MATERIAL AND
methods130 root-filled teeth with signs/symptoms of VRFs underwent clinical and CBCT assessments. Definite diagnosis of VRF was confirmed by endodontic microsurgical (EMS) exploration. Determination of diagnostic performance of CBCT was based on standard algorithms derived from two-way contingency table analysis. Predictive value of diagnostic criteria and the association between predictor variables with VRFs were analyzed using logistic regression models.
resultsVRFs were detected during EMS in 50% of the teeth. Based on the finding of fracture lines on CBCT scans, sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were 86.2%, 13.8%, and 50%, respectively. Teeth having more than three diagnostic criteria present had significant higher odds for VRF diagnosis. After logistic regression analysis, parafunctional habits, one-canal roots, excessive root canal enlargement, and absence of intra-radicular posts remained as robust predictor variables of VRFs.
conclusionsAlthough the sensitivity of CBCT for VRFs detection is high, the risk of false-positive results related to its low specificity makes that all suspected cases must be confirmed by surgical exploration. VRFs cannot be reliably diagnosed by isolated clinical signs/symptoms; instead those teeth possessing more than three diagnostic criteria might be considered practically pathognomonic. The parafunctional habits, one-canal roots, excessive root canal enlargement, and the absence of intra-radicular posts may act strongly/independently for the occurrence of VRFs in endodontically treated teeth.
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.