ArticleJournal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences2024
Proposed Classification of Midline Lingual Canal: A CBCT Study.
Article in Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences, 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.
- Lingual foramina on cone beam computed tomography: A retrospective radiographic study.Journal of oral biology and craniofacial researchArticle
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
Background: Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) has identified some important anatomical landmarks in inter-foraminal region, which can contribute to the explanation of hemorrhagic and nervous disturbances occurring in this region following implant placement. Materials And Methods: The study included 100 subjects. CBCT scans were performed. The number of midline lingual foramina and their diameter was measured. The length of the midline lingual canal, direction, and distances of the canal from the crest of the ridge, lower border of mandible, labial cortex, and lingual cortex were measured. Results: All subjects showed at least one Midline Lingual Canal (MLC). The average diameter was 1.67 mm. Average length of the canal was 7.34 mm. Thirty percent of subjects are in group N (single canals), 70% of subjects are in group M (multiple canals). The maximum canals were in D2 group (80%). Conclusion: CBCT can facilitate the visibility of MLC, if any. Clinicians should take note of the position of the midline mandibular lingual canal and approach this area with caution.
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.