ArticleOral and maxillofacial surgery2025
Prevalence and morphometric analysis of retromolar canals and foramina: a cone-beam computed tomography study.
Article in Oral and maxillofacial surgery, 2025. 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.
- Investigation of the Prevalence and Characteristics of the Retromolar Canal Using Cone-Beam Computed Tomography in a Turkish Sample.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe retromolar region of the mandible is an anatomically complex area that harbors important neurovascular structures, including the retromolar canal (RMC) and retromolar foramen (RMF). Understanding the prevalence and characteristics of these anatomical variations is crucial for safe and effective dental and maxillofacial procedures. This study aimed to comprehensively investigate RMCs and RMFs using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) imaging.
methodsThis study analyzed CBCT scans of 160 subjects (80 males, 80 females) aged 18 years and above. The presence and morphology of RMCs were assessed, and their spatial relationships with adjacent structures were measured. Statistical analysis using the ANOVA and chi-square tests to evaluate the associations between RMC characteristics and demographic factors yielded no significant results.
resultsRMCs were present in 37 out of 160 subjects (23.1%). The most prevalent type of RMC was the curved Type B (62.2%), followed by Type A (29.7%) and Type C (8.1%). RMFs were predominantly located in a buccal position relative to the mandibular third molar (86.5%). The study also provided comprehensive morphometric data on the retromolar canals (RMCs) and foramina (RMFs) observed in the study population. Key measurements included the distance from the buccal and lingual cortices to the RMCs, the distance from the mandibular foramen to the RMC origin, and the distances from the RMF to the mandibular canal and adjacent molars. These detailed spatial relationships were analyzed across different age groups and between genders. The data revealed trends, such as decreasing buccal distances and increasing lingual distances with advancing age. This morphometric information is valuable for clinicians when planning procedures in the retromolar region, as it can guide preoperative assessment and help mitigate the risk of neurovascular complications associated with the variable anatomy of RMCs and RMFs.
conclusionThis comprehensive CBCT study provides valuable insights into the prevalence, morphology, and spatial relationships of RMCs and RMFs. The variable anatomical features of these structures can have significant clinical implications for various dental and maxillofacial procedures. The data presented in this study can serve as a reference for clinicians to enhance preoperative assessment and improve the safety and efficacy of interventions in the retromolar region.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40153048What 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.