ArticleImaging science in dentistry2024
Combination of metal artifact reduction and sharpening filter application for horizontal root fracture diagnosis in teeth adjacent to a zirconia implant.
Article in Imaging science in dentistry, 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.
- Comparison between dual-angle periapical technique and cone-beam computed tomography in the identification of a second canal in mandibular incisors in the presence of a zirconia implant: An in vitro study.Imaging science in dentistry · 2026Article
- Influence of increased slice thickness and sharpening filter application in the detection of bone graft loss around implants.Imaging science in dentistry · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This study examined the influence of metal artifact reduction (MAR), the application of sharpening filters, and their combination on the diagnosis of horizontal root fracture (HRF) in teeth adjacent to a zirconia implant on cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) examinations. Materials and Methods: Nineteen single-rooted teeth (9 with HRF and 10 without) were individually positioned in the right central incisor socket of a dry human maxilla. A zirconia implant was placed adjacent to each tooth. Imaging was performed using an OP300 Maxio CBCT (Instrumentarium, Tuusula, Finland) unit with the following settings: a current of 8 mA, both MAR modes (enabled and disabled), a 5×5 cm field of view, a voxel size of 0.085 mm, and a peak kilovoltage of 90 kVp. Four oral and maxillofacial radiologists independently evaluated the CBCT scans under both MAR conditions and across 3 levels of sharpening filter application (none, Sharpen 1×, and Sharpen 2×). Diagnostic metrics were calculated and compared using 2-way analysis of variance (α=5%). The weighted kappa test was used to assess intra- and inter-examiner reliability in the diagnosis of HRF. Results: MAR tool activation, sharpening filter use, and their combination did not significantly impact the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, sensitivity, or specificity of HRF diagnosis ( Conclusion: The diagnosis of HRF in a tooth adjacent to a zirconia implant is not affected by the activation of MAR, the application of a sharpening filter, or the combination of these tools.
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.