ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2021
Correlation of Panoramic Radiography, Cone-Beam Computed Tomography, and Three-Dimensional Printing in the Assessment of the Spatial Location of Impacted Mandibular Third Molars.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative Analysis of Diagnostic Accuracy of OPG and CBCT in the Evaluation of Impacted Mandibular third Molar Proximity to the Mandibular Canal.Current medical imaging · 2026Article
- Impacted mandibular third molars: a comparison of orthopantomography and cone-beam computed tomography imaging in predicting surgical difficulty.Archives of craniofacial surgery · 2024Article
- Anatomic feasibility of a modified 3-distal site anesthesia injection method for impacted mandibular third molar extraction using cone-beam computed tomography.Annals of translational medicine · 2022Article
- Comparison of the Treatment Efficacy of Endo-Perio Lesions Using a Standard Treatment Protocol and Extended by Using a Diode Laser (940 nm).Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The development of radiology, rapid prototyping techniques, and the increasingly common use of 3D printing in dentistry inspires the use of these techniques to improve diagnostic and therapeutic processes. This study aimed to conduct a retrospective comparative analysis of dental panoramic radiographs, cone-beam computed tomography, and 3D printing in preoperative assessment of the procedure's difficulty. Thirty clinical cases with a high degree of difficulty were selected, and based on evaluation with CBCT, a virtual 3D model of the region of surgical procedure was created, which was then printed using a 3D printer. The comparative analysis included the linear measurements performed in dental panoramic radiographs, cone-beam computed tomography, and 3D models in a preoperative assessment of the degree of retention and difficulty of impacted mandibular third molars in the mandible. Linear measurements performed on dental panoramic radiographs were significantly lower than in cone-beam computed tomography and 3D models. No statistically significant differences were obtained in linear measurements between 3D models and cone-beam computed tomography images except for the measurement of the lingual lamina thickness; however, due to the insignificant differences in measurements, with a mean of only 80 µm, the elective procedure of removal of the impacted third molar in the mandible may be safe.
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.