ArticleClinical oral investigations2025
In vivo periodontal ultrasound imaging via a hockey-stick transducer and comparison to periodontal probing: a proof-of-concept study.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 2025. 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.
- Ultrasound-based assessment of peri-implant mucosal thickness: an ex vivo comparative study with artificial intelligence-assisted image analysis.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Quantification of Supracrestal Tissue Attachment Using High-Frequency Ultrasound.Dento maxillo facial radiology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe objective of this study is to evaluate a compact ultrasound transducer to image anatomical biomarkers for periodontal diagnosis of teeth, including difficult-to-reach posterior teeth. MATERIALS AND
methodsA 9-MHz hockey-stick transducer was used to image 53 premolars, 30 molars, and 79 incisors and canines from 13 subjects. The alveolar bone crest (ABC), cementoenamel junction (CEJ), and gingival margin (GM) were identified by ultrasound imaging. The image-based distances between these anatomic landmarks were measured for iABC (ABC to CEJ), iGR (GM to CEJ) and iGH (ABC to GM). The measurements were compared to corresponding parameters obtained from clinical examination. The measurements were also used to assess periodontal health and were compared with clinical diagnosis.
resultsThe average iGR measurements were - 1.12 mm (i.e., 1.12 mm above the CEJ) for gingivitis and Stage I periodontitis, and - 0.56 mm for Stage III periodontitis, demonstrating a significant increase in gingival recession in patients with severe periodontitis (Student t-test, unpaired, two-tailed, p < 0.0001). The iGH measurements distinguished gingivitis, Stage I periodontitis group, and the Stage III periodontitis group (unpaired, two-tailed t-test, p < 0.05 for PPD, and p = 0.05 for iGH).
conclusionNon-invasive periodontal ultrasound imaging can be used to stratify subjects with differing periodontal disease severity. The clinical parameters obtained from ultrasound imaging with the hockey-stick transducer are reproducible. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The compact ultrasound transducer can be used as a screening tool for patients affected by periodontitis for clinical examination and treatment.
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.