ReviewCureus2025
Bibliometric Analysis of the 100 Most-Cited Articles on Endodontic Surgery.
Review in Cureus, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Endodontic surgery (ES) includes numerous methods for treating teeth with a history of failed root canal treatment. This 49-year bibliometric analysis aimed to identify the 100 most-cited papers on ES published during 1976-2024 and examine their bibliometric properties. The top 100 cited publications from the Web of Science (WoS) database on ES were used as the dataset for the bibliometric research. Information regarding the publication year, single or multiple authorship, clinical or non-clinical research, mode of accessibility, level of evidence (LOE), geographic location, institution, authors, and keywords was extracted for each article. The VOSviewer (v.1.6.10; https://www.vosviewer.com) was used for co-author, co-citation, and keyword analysis. SPSS version 27 was used for data analysis. Most papers (n = 88) were original research articles, in contrast to review articles (n = 12). Articles authored by multiple authors gathered higher citations. LOE II exhibited the greatest number of publications (25%). Cohort (22%) and cross-sectional studies (14%) were the most common research designs. Over one-third of publications came from the United States, with the University of Pennsylvania being the top producer. The Journal of Endodontics published more than half of the articles. Euiseong Kim authored the majority of the papers, followed by Syngcuk Kim. The most influential keywords were healing, MTA (mineral trioxide aggregate), and periapical surgery. This research reveals a vibrant and growing academic environment worldwide, with a notable uptick in the past 20 years. The results of this study show how important international collaboration is to the advancement of ES and allow readers to identify the prolific authors, countries, organizations, and journals working in this area. Among all fields of study, outcomes of ES have the most-cited articles, followed by root-end filling materials. Clinical studies were more prevalent, with cohort studies being the most preferred study design.
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.