ArticleCureus2024
Cone-Beam Computed Tomography Study of Incisive Canal and Maxillary Central Incisors in Dravidian Population.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionEn-masse maxillary anterior retraction is necessary to attain an esthetic profile in Angle's class I bimaxillary dentoalveolar protrusion and Angle's class II division 1 malocclusion. The objective of this study was to evaluate configurational relationships between maxillary incisors and incisive canal in Angle's class I bialveolar protrusion and Angle's class II division 1 malocclusion by cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT).
methodsA total of 108 adult CBCT scans of 54-skeletal class I bialveolar protrusion and 54-skeletal class II division 1 malocclusions were retrospectively analyzed. Angles between palatal plane and axis of maxillary alveolar border (θ1), incisive canal (θ2), and maxillary right central incisor (θ3) were measured in relation to the midsagittal plane. Linear measurements such as incisive canal width (IC-IC), medial inter-root distance (Rm-Rm), posterior inter-root distance (Rp-Rp), anteroposterior distance from Rm to tangent of right central incisor (11 Rm-Cat), and left central incisor (21 Rm-Cat)
resultsEstimated distance from incisor root to incisive canal was 5-6 mm in both groups slightly influenced by skeletal class and vertical levels but not gender. Mann-Whitney test demonstrated significant differences between groups at three vertical levels (p<0.05). Only θ2 revealed a significant difference (p<0.05) between malocclusions compared to θ1 and θ3. The angular measurements for both malocclusions were positively correlated (p<0.05).
conclusionSagittal root-canal cortical plate distance varied significantly in both malocclusions (5-6 mm). Inter-root distance (Rp-Rp) was greater than incisive canal width (IC-IC) at all three vertical levels indicating a reduced possibility of canal invasion after maximum retraction at posterior levels.
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.