ReviewFrontiers in oncology2025
Critical review of OCT in clinical practice for the assessment of oral lesions.
Review in Frontiers in oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Automated Anatomical Landmark Localization in Anterior Segment OCT Images Using an Efficient Deep Learning Framework.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Portable TD-OCT Scanner for Dental Use.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Head and Neck Surgical Oncology: A State-of-the-Art Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Ultrasensitive detection of oral cancer biomarkers CD63 and CD44 in exosomes using janus particles: a rotational diffusometry-based assay.The Saudi dental journal · 2026Article
- Mandibular Arch Morphology in Normodivergent Patients With Impacted Maxillary Canines: A Case-Control Study.International journal of dentistry · 2026Article
- Quantitative and longitudinal monitoring of cancer cell invasion in a three-dimensional in vitro model of oral cancer using optical coherence tomography.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- The Role of Brachytherapy in the Management of Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Photodynamic therapy and nanomedicine: current knowledge, limitations, and applications in oral squamous cell carcinoma: a narrative review.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Review
- Etoricoxib and its hidden risks: a case-based review of dermatological, hematological, and cardiovascular complications.EXCLI journal · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT) is an advanced imaging technique that is widely used in ophthalmology and is increasingly being applied in other fields of medicine. In oral oncology, OCT offers high-resolution, non-invasive (uses non-ionizing light), label-free, real-time imaging, providing detailed insights into tissue microanatomy and cellular structures, thus having the potential to improve early detection, monitoring and cost-effective screening of high-risk populations. However, significant challenges remain in applying OCT to OSCC and OPMDs, particularly in clinical practice. Methods: A comprehensive search of PUBMED, SCOPUS, and Web of Science databases was performed up to October 2024. Additional manual searches were conducted by screening article bibliographies. Inclusion criteria encompassed studies published in English involving human subjects and evaluating the role of OCT in OSCC and OPMD assessment, OCT utilization for margin resection, and artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted interpretation of OCT images. After removal of duplicates and screening of titles and abstracts, full-text analysis was conducted on eligible studies. Results: The technique has been investigated for its accuracy in identifying malignant changes in tissues before surgery and/or evaluating resection margins during surgery. Although early studies, primarily in animal models, have been extended to humans and have demonstrated the potential of OCT to accurately assess resection margins and identify precancerous lesions, significant limitations persist. The high cost of OCT equipment reduces its accessibility, availability and widespread use as a common investigation methodology in non-experimental settings. In addition, there is significant heterogeneity in the methodologies used to interpret OCT data, which is strictly operator dependent and may affect standardization and reproducibility of results. This is further complicated by the introduction and increased trend to adopt artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms in imaging evaluation. Machine learning and deep learning algorithms have shown superior diagnostic sensitivity and accuracy compared to clinician judgment. However, especially when used to assess resection margins, these algorithms may be significantly affected by sample extension and preparation, which remains a barrier to the routine clinical application of OCT systems. Conclusion: Addressing the advantages and challenges of this emerging technique may help focus future research on standardizing application protocols and enhancing AI-assisted analysis to improve diagnostic performance and facilitate clinical translation.
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.