ArticleClinical oral investigations2024
The effect of cone beam computerized tomography voxel size and the presence of root filling on the assessment of middle mesial canals in mandibular molar teeth.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 2024. 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.
- Prevalence and morphometric assessment of the middle mesial canal in mandibular first molars in a turkish population: A CBCT study.Odontology · 2026Article
- Prevalence and morphology of middle mesial canals in mandibular first molars and their relationship with anatomical aspects of the mesial root: a CBCT analysis.BMC oral health · 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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe study aims to compare the detection of the middle mesial canal (MMC) in mandibular molar teeth using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) with different voxel sizes when the mesiobuccal (MB) and mesiolingual (ML) canals have three distinct phases (unpreparation, preparation and obturation and the removal of the obturation and repreparation).
methodsTwo hundred forty-two extracted human mandibular molars were collected and kept in a physiological saline solution prior to use. 0.2-, 0.28- and 0.35-mm voxel sizes CBCT (n = 242) were performed in three phases (Ph): Ph1, no MB and ML canal preparation or obturation; Ph2, after MB and ML canals preparation and obturation; and Ph3, after the removal of the obturation of MB and ML canals and canals repreparation. Images were analyzed using OnDemand3D® software. After the CBCT acquisition in Ph3, all the samples were clarified to visualize the presence of the MMC directly. A blinded, previously calibrated examiner analyzed all the images.
resultsThe MMC was detected in 15 of the 242 teeth after the clearing technique. The lowest MMC detection rate was observed at 0.35-mm voxel size regardless of the ML and MB canal condition, while the highest was observed at 0.2-mm voxel size (P < 0.05). There is no statistically significant difference between 0.2-mm and 0.28-mm voxel sizes (P > 0.05). In all voxel sizes, the highest rate of detectability of the MMC was seen in Phase 1, while the lowest was in Phase 2.
conclusionsIt may be appropriate to take a 0.20-mm voxel size CBCT image, especially after the removal of root canal filling. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: An appropriate CBCT voxel size and the absence of root canal filling in the root canal system help to detect the missing MMC.
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.