ArticleBMC oral health2023
Palatal approach for surgical removal of mesioangularly impacted maxillary third molar - a pilot study.
Article in BMC oral health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Expert consensus on the management of third molar health.International journal of oral science · 2026Review
- Radiological and statistical analysis of impacted maxillary third molars in Korean adults.Journal of the Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons · 2025Article
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
objectiveThis study aimed to investigate the application of the palatal approach for surgical removal of IMTM, and to evaluate its success rate, surgical duration, postoperative outcomes, and incidence of complications.
methodPatients with mesioangularly IMTM (Archer Classification Class B) in the none-buccal position to the adjacent second molar, which were indicated for surgical removal, were enrolled in this study. The patients were assigned into two groups according to the surgical approach: the buccal or palatal approach. The impacted tooth positions, diagnosis, past dental and medical history, and radiographic examination were recorded pre-operatively. The duration, surgery details, and surgical complications were documented during the surgery.
result40 teeth were enrolled in our study. All teeth were removed completely. The operation time was significantly shorter in the palatal approach group compared to the buccal approach group (13.3 ± 2.8 min vs. 22.3 ± 5.5 min, P<0.001). The incidence of traumatic ulcers of the lips was significantly higher in the buccal approach group than in the palatal approach group (7/20 vs. 0/20, P = 0.008).
conclusionIt is more efficient to perform surgery with a palatal approach if a Class B mesioangularly IMTM is located in the non-buccal aspect of the adjacent second molar. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ChiCTR2000040063.
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.