ArticleDento maxillo facial radiology2022
Sonographic features of various dental materials and foreign bodies.
Article in Dento maxillo facial radiology, 2022. 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ultrasonographic assessment of an esophageal foreign body with emphasis on material properties: a case report.Journal of ultrasound · 2026Article
- In vitro comparison of the imaging properties of dental materials in soft tissue using ultrasonography and cone beam computed tomography.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Evaluation of foreign bodies in the maxillofacial region with cone beam computed tomography and ultrasonography: an ex vivo study.BMC medical imaging · 2025Article
- Ultrasonographic and CBCT analysis of foreign bodies and dental materials.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Overview of Ultrasound in Dentistry for Advancing Research Methodology and Patient Care Quality with Emphasis on Periodontal/Peri-implant Applications.Zeitschrift fur medizinische Physik · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo reveal the sonographic characteristics of various foreign bodies and dental materials to aid diagnosis. METHODS AND MATERIALS: 24 objects consisting of various dental materials and foreign bodies were included in the study. Objects were embedded in bovine gelatin. Images of the objects were obtained by conventional radiography and ultrasonography (USG). Opacities were evaluated by conventional radiography. Their visibility and posterior acoustic behaviors were examined by USG. In addition, the actual sizes of the objects and their dimensions measured by USG were compared.
resultsAll objects included in the study, including non-opaque ones, could be visualized by USG. When the posterior acoustic behavior of objects was examined, 15 of the objects (62.5%) caused posterior acoustic shadowing on USG. While 6 of the objects (25%) did not have any USG artifacts, 2 of them (8,3%) had comet tail artifact and 1 of them (4,2%) had reverberation artifact. There was no statistically significant difference between the actual dimensions of the objects and their dimensions measured by USG (
conclusionUSG is a very useful technique for imaging foreign bodies and dental materials, it can even show objects that cannot be seen in X-rays on
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.