Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35585297›Full record

ArticleJournal of orofacial orthopedics = Fortschritte der Kieferorthopadie : Organ/official journal Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Kieferorthopadie2023

Prevalence of incidental findings in adult vs. adolescent patients in the course of orthodontic X-ray diagnostics.

Daniela Klenke, Petra Santander, Charlotte Vehring, Anja Quast, Jan Sommerlath Sohns, Sebastian Krohn, Philipp Meyer-Marcotty

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of orofacial orthopedics = Fortschritte der Kieferorthopadie : Organ/official journal Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Kieferorthopadie, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Radiodiagnostics of standard orthodontic radiographs-dental and extradental incidental findings : Do we see everything we should see?Journal of orofacial orthopedics = Fortschritte der Kieferorthopadie : Organ/official journal Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Kieferorthopadie · 2024
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Daniela KlenkeDepartment of Orthodontics, University Medical Centre Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany. daniela.klenke@med.uni-goettingen.de.
Petra SantanderDepartment of Orthodontics, University Medical Centre Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany.
Charlotte VehringDepartment of Orthodontics, University Medical Centre Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany.
Anja QuastDepartment of Orthodontics, University Medical Centre Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany.
Jan Sommerlath SohnsDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany.
Sebastian KrohnDepartment of Prosthodontics, University Medical Centre Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany.
Philipp Meyer-MarcottyDepartment of Orthodontics, University Medical Centre Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany.
Universitätsmedizin Göttingen · DEMedizinische Hochschule Hannover · DEUniversity of Göttingen · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveDue to increasing numbers of adult patients presenting to orthodontic practices, an increase in incidental findings on diagnostic X‑rays, which are the cornerstone of orthodontic diagnostics, is expected. This raises the clinically relevant question of whether an age effect exists regarding prevalence, localisation and severity of incidental findings on orthodontic diagnostic X‑rays. MATERIALS AND

methodsThe clinical, primarily retrospective study examined pathological incidental findings from 600 orthopantomograms (OPT) and lateral cephalogram (LC) images in two groups of orthodontic patients (group I: 150 children/adolescents, age 11.89 ± 2.47 years; group II: 150 adults, age 27.03 ± 10.42 years). Prevalence, localisation and severity of the findings were recorded based on a classification sheet. The assessment was done by three experienced examiners following a systematic approach along the nine locations: mandible, maxilla, dentition, paranasal sinuses, temporomandibular joint, cranial base, orbit, cervical spine, soft tissues.

resultsIn all, 1458 incidental findings were detected, with 66% of the findings having occurred away from the dentition. There was a significant age effect (p < 0.001) with respect to the prevalence of incidental findings (group II-adults 1026 findings-OPT: 566/LC 460 vs. group I-children/adolescents 432 findings-OPT: 221/LC 211). Regarding localisation, incidental findings in adults commonly occurred in the dentition, paranasal sinuses and mandibular regions. Furthermore, analysis of the LC images revealed significantly more incidental findings in the area of the cranial base and cervical spine in adults (p < 0.001, p = 0.003). Categorisation according to the severity of the incidental findings showed that 33% of the incidental findings needed further diagnostic investigation and possibly treatment by other specialities.

conclusionDiagnostic assessment using orthodontic diagnostic X‑rays results in a high prevalence of incidental findings away from the dentition. Particularly in adults, a large number of incidental findings outside the dental/alveolar region may be expected on orthodontic diagnostic X‑rays. Thus, a structured approach during diagnostic assessment is required to minimise the extent to which incidental findings of clinical relevance are overlooked.

Indexed as

Incidental FindingsOrthodonticsRadiography, PanoramicAdolescentAdultFemaleHumansMaleMandibleMaxillaPrevalenceSkullYoung AdultAge effectLateral cephalogramOrthodontic diagnosticsOrthopantomogramsTreatment planning

Identifiers

PMID35585297
PMCPMC10462506
OpenAlexW4280535050

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.