ArticleBMC oral health2025
Ultrasonographic and CBCT analysis of foreign bodies and dental materials.
Article in BMC oral health, 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.
- Management of dental-origin gastrointestinal foreign bodies: a proposed site-based, risk-stratified framework for multidisciplinary care.Clinical oral investigations · 2026Review
- In vitro comparison of the imaging properties of dental materials in soft tissue using ultrasonography and cone beam computed tomography.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo reveal the radiodensity and sonographic characteristics of various foreign bodies and dental materials to aid in the diagnosis of these materials.
methodsThe study included 41 objects consisting of various foreign bodies and dental materials. The objects were examined by embedding them in bovine gelatin, an in vitro environment and their radiodensity was evaluated using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). Additionally, their visibility and posterior acoustic behaviors were examined using ultrasonography (USG).
resultsWhen the radiodensity of the objects was examined in CBCT images, 27 objects (65.9%) were found to be hyperdense, while 14 objects (34.1%) were identified as isodense. All foreign bodies and dental materials included in the study were successfully visualized using USG. When the acoustic behaviors of the objects were examined, it was found that 24 materials (58.5%) caused posterior acoustic shadowing on USG. While no artifacts were detected in eight materials (19.5%), comet tail artifacts were observed in seven materials (17%), and reverberation artifacts were seen in two materials (5%).
conclusionsCBCT is an important technique for imaging foreign bodies and dental materials. Nonetheless, in an in vitro environment, USG can visualize objects that cannot be seen with CBCT. These findings may assist clinicians in selecting the most appropriate imaging method for identifying accidentally ingested or embedded foreign bodies and dental materials, especially in emergency or surgical settings.
trial registrationWe would like to clarify that our study is an in vivo experiment that does not involve human participants. Therefore, it does not fall within the scope of clinical trial registration requirements under current international guidelines.
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.