ArticleImaging science in dentistry2022
Risk factors for external root resorption of maxillary second molars associated with third molars.
Article in Imaging science in dentistry, 2022. 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Incidence and predictors of root resorption after delayed replantation of permanent teeth.Acta odontologica Scandinavica · 2026Article
- A Prediction Model for External Root Resorption of the Second Molars Associated With Third Molars.International dental journal · 2025Article
- Exceptional bone remodeling over composite restoration in the management of external root resorption: A case report.SAGE open medical case reports · 2024Article
- Application of Cone Beam Computed Tomography in Risk Assessment of Lower Third Molar Surgery.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of panoramic images compared to cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) imaging for maxillary third molar (M3)-associated external root resorption (ERR), and to identify the risk factors of ERR on panoramic images. Materials and Methods: The study population was composed of all patients who underwent panoramic imaging at Dankook University Dental Hospital from May to October 2019. In total, 397 cases of maxillary M3s in 247 patients (147 men and 100 women) were included. The diagnostic accuracy of ERR in panoramic images compared to CBCT images was evaluated using the chi-square test. To identify risk factors for ERR, dental records and panoramic findings were evaluated by logistic regression analysis. Results: The diagnostic accuracy of ERR on panoramic images was 0.79 compared to CBCT images ( Conclusion: ERR related to M3s is a common clinical condition, and superimposition of M3 onto M2 on panoramic images was the most important risk factor for ERR. It seemed that CBCT examinations for maxillary M3s might be indicated for ERR diagnosis especially if panoramic radiographs show superimposition of M3 onto M2. Impaction itself was also a risk factor, and it should be carefully examined.
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.