ArticleJournal of orthodontic science2025
Prevalence of canine transmigration: Introducing a novel classification for mandibular canine transmigration.
Article in Journal of orthodontic science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of canine transmigration and impaction among patients at a tertiary dental health care center in India, using panoramic radiographs, and to introduce a novel classification system for mandibular canine transmigration. MATERIALS AND
methodsA retrospective analysis of digital orthopantomograms (OPGs) of 30,000 patients above the age of 12 years, obtained from a tertiary dental health care center was conducted to assess the prevalence of canine transmigration and canine impaction.
resultsA total of 30,000 OPGs were examined, revealing 341 transmigrated canines, with an overall prevalence of 1.1%. Transmigration was more common in the mandible (246 canines, 0.8%) than in the maxilla (95 canines, 0.3%), and slightly more prevalent in females, though not statistically significant. In the mandible, 235 cases were unilateral and 11 were bilateral. All maxillary cases were unilateral. The 246 transmigrated mandibular canines were categorized using the new MBS classification system: Group I (117), Group II (100), Group III (16), Group IV (2), and Group V (11).
conclusionsCanine impaction was more prevalent in the maxilla, whereas transmigration was more prevalent in the mandible. The MBS classification system showed the highest prevalence in Group I (oblique), followed by Group II, with the lowest in Groups III (vertical) and Group IV. This system provides a more detailed and clinically useful framework than previous classifications.
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.