ReviewCureus2023
Prevalence of Periapical Radiolucency and Conventional Root Canal Treatment in Adults: A Systematic Review of Cross-Sectional Studies.
Review in Cureus, 2023. 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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of failed endodontically treated molar teeth using micro-computed tomography.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Evaluation of preoperative apical periodontitis, treatment indications, and methods in endodontically treated teeth: a retrospective study.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Oral health status of Dutch Armed Forces recruits in the years 2000, 2010 and 2020, a retrospective repeated cross-sectional study.BMC oral health · 2024Article
- Selective root canal retreatment of a maxillary first molar: a case report with a 9-year follow up.Frontiers in dental medicine · 2024Article
- Cone-Beam Computed Tomography Assessment of Quality of Endodontic Treatment and Prevalence of Procedural Errors in Mandibular Molars.International journal of clinical practice · 2023Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cross-sectional studies assess a population's health state and the prevalence of diseases or treatments. Few systematic reviews regarding the prevalence of periapical radiolucency (PARL) and nonsurgical root canal treatment (NSRCT) were conducted in the last decade. The goal of this study was to collect and review all updated and available cross-sectional studies that focus on the prevalence of both PARL and NSRCT in adult populations. It involves a systematic literature review of cross-sectional studies on the prevalence of PARL and NSRCT published from 1987 to 2022 in PubMed, Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Scopus with specific keywords used in the search process. A total of 52 articles were included in this systematic review. The majority of the included articles were from different populations. The overall prevalence of teeth with PARL was 43,522 (6.40%), while the prevalence of NSRCT teeth was 52,149 (7.67%). On the other hand, the overall prevalence of PARL in teeth that have received endodontic treatment and teeth that have not received endodontic treatment were 22,110 (3.25%) and 21,412 (3.15%), respectively. A meta-analysis was not performed due to underreporting of publication bias and the high degree of heterogeneity between studies. The overall risk of bias assessment revealed a low risk of bias in 25 (48%) of the included studies. The prevalence of NSRCT was higher at 7.67%, followed by PARL at approximately 6.40%. However, future studies are recommended to investigate the prevalence of both PARL and NSRCT in different patient populations.
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.