Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40813553›Full record

ArticleOdontology2026

Assessment of unfilled and filled canals in mandibular incisors: comparison between periapical radiography and cone-beam computed tomography.

G C G Alcebíades, G N Alves Dos Santos, F C Lopes-Olhê, J F Mazzi-Chaves, M D Sousa-Neto, H Gaêta-Araujo

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Odontology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

G C G AlcebíadesDepartment of Restorative Dentistry, Ribeirao Preto School of Dentistry, University of Sao Paulo (USP), Ribeirao Preto, Sao Paulo, 14040-904, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5385-8954
G N Alves Dos SantosDepartment of Restorative Dentistry, Ribeirao Preto School of Dentistry, University of Sao Paulo (USP), Ribeirao Preto, Sao Paulo, 14040-904, Brazil.
F C Lopes-OlhêDepartment of Restorative Dentistry, Ribeirao Preto School of Dentistry, University of Sao Paulo (USP), Ribeirao Preto, Sao Paulo, 14040-904, Brazil.
J F Mazzi-ChavesDepartment of Restorative Dentistry, Ribeirao Preto School of Dentistry, University of Sao Paulo (USP), Ribeirao Preto, Sao Paulo, 14040-904, Brazil.
M D Sousa-NetoDepartment of Restorative Dentistry, Ribeirao Preto School of Dentistry, University of Sao Paulo (USP), Ribeirao Preto, Sao Paulo, 14040-904, Brazil.
H Gaêta-AraujoDivision of Oral Radiology, Department of Stomatology, Public Health, and Forensic Dentistry, Ribeirao Preto School of Dentistry, University of Sao Paulo (USP), Ribeirao Preto, Sao Paulo, 14040-904, Brazil. hugo.gaeta@usp.br.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5087-5022

Funding

Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior 88887.990060/2024-00
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim is to compare periapical radiography and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) in assessing the number of root canals in mandibular incisors and in identifying untreated canals, using microcomputed tomography (microCT) as the reference standard. Images of forty-two mandibular incisors were obtained by microCT, periapical radiography, and CBCT. Five endodontist examiners independently analyzed the periapical and CBCT images to identify the presence of one or two canals. Subsequently, 10 teeth with two canals were selected and root canals obturated (5 teeth with only one canal obturated and 5 with both canals obturated). New periapical and CBCT images were acquired and the examiners identified any unfilled canals. Data analysis compared imaging methods with a significance level of 5%, using McNemar and chi-square tests. In pre-treatment assessment with periapical radiography, 40% of two-canal incisors were interpreted as having only one canal, showing a statistically significant difference (p = 0.002) compared to microCT images. CBCT correctly identified the number of canals in 85.5% and 85.9% of teeth with 1 and 2 canals, respectively, with no significant differences compared to microCT (p = 0.857). For post-treatment assessment, there were no statistically significant differences between periapical radiography and CBCT for the assessment of teeth with one (p = 0.145) or two (p = 0.099) filled canals. While 28% of the teeth with one filled canal was identified in CBCT, 48% of those were identified in periapical radiography. CBCT is superior to periapical radiography in detecting root canals in mandibular incisors before endodontic treatment. However, the diagnostic accuracy of periapical radiographs and CBCT images in post-treatment is impacted by the presence of obturation material.

Indexed as

Cone-Beam Computed TomographyDental Pulp CavityIncisorRadiography, DentalHumansMandibleRoot Canal ObturationX-Ray MicrotomographyCone-beam computed tomographyDigital dental radiographyEndodonticsRoot canal treatmentX-ray microtomography

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.