SynthesisScientific reports2024
Morphology and root canal configuration of maxillary lateral incisors: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Morphology of Maxillary Central Incisors in a Mixed Swiss-German Population by Means of Micro-CT.Dentistry journal · 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
The purpose of this study was to explore maxillary lateral incisors (MxLI) intern morphology by analyzing existing literature. We searched five electronical databases (Cochrane, Embase, LILACS, Scopus, MEDLINE via PubMed) using keywords and predefined search terms. Additional studies were identified by cross-referencing and reviewing bibliographies of relevant articles. From 92 initial studies, 27 duplicates were removed, and 65 records screened. After full-text review and hand searching were 19 studies included. The most reported root canal configurations (RCC) of MxLI were Vertucci (Ve) I (1-1-1/1; 78.1-100%), Ve II (2-2-1/1; 0.2-5%), Ve III (1-2-1/1; 0.1-14.6%), Ve IV (2-2-2/2; 0.5%), and Ve V (1-1-2/2; 0.5-4.9%). A meta-analysis of six studies from Europe and Asia indicated sex-differentiated patterns in RCC prevalence: higher occurrences of Ve II (2-2-1/1; OR [95%CI] = 1.19 [0.51, 2.73]), Ve III (1-2-1/1; (OR [95%CI] = 1.72 [0.61, 4.85]), and Ve V (1-1-2/2; (OR [95%CI] = 2.95 [1.02, 8.55]) configurations were noted in males, whereas females predominantly exhibited Ve I (1-1-1/1; [95%CI] = 0.99 [0.97, 1.02]), and Ve IV (2-2-2/2; (OR [95%CI] = 0.11 [0.01, 2.02]). Examination methods varied, with cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) being most commonly (n = 11), followed by staining & clearing (n = 5), and radiographic analysis (n = 1). The predominant RCC in MxLI is type Vertucci I. CBCT is the most common method for assessing the morphology of root canals. However, up to 20% of cases may present with complex and sex-specific patterns, highlighting the need for clinicians to be aware of these differences to prevent complications during endodontic treatments.
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.