ArticleBMC oral health2025
Localization of the mental foramen in relation to the mandibular bone using ultrasonography and orthopantomography: a comparative study in the Turkish population.
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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Evaluation of Mental Foramen Position and Morphology on Panoramic Radiographs.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2026Article
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
backgroundThe mental foramen (MF) is a critical anatomical landmark in dental and maxillofacial procedures. Accurate localization is essential to avoid nerve injury. While orthopantomography (OPG) is commonly used, it has limitations due to its two-dimensional nature and susceptibility to artifacts. Ultrasonography (USG), which offers real-time imaging without ionizing radiation, has emerged as a promising alternative. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of OPG and USG in identifying the MF and measuring its distance to the mandibular bone.
methodsA total of 120 patients (60 males, 60 females), aged 18 and older, were included in the study. A total of 240 mental foramina were evaluated. Vertical measurements were taken from the superior border of the MF to the alveolar crest and from the inferior border to the inferior cortical border of the mandible. Ultrasonographic imaging was performed using an extraoral probe in a longitudinal position. OPGs were acquired using standard protocols, and calibration was achieved by attaching orthodontic wires to the second premolars. All measurements were taken on calibrated digital images using dedicated measurement software. Statistical analysis included paired samples t-test, one-way ANOVA, independent samples t-test, and Pearson correlation.
resultsSignificant differences were found between the two methods in all regions (p < 0.05), with OPG yielding higher distance values than USG. MF-mandibular bone distances were significantly greater in males than in females (p < 0.01). OPG showed significantly greater inferior distances in participants aged 40 years and older, while USG revealed no significant age-related differences. A strong positive correlation (r = 0.801-0.911) and high intra-observer reliability (r = 0.982-0.996) were observed between the methods.
conclusionsThis study demonstrates that USG is a reliable, non-invasive alternative to OPG for locating the mental foramen. Both methods showed a strong correlation (r = 0.801-0.911), with USG minimizing radiation exposure. OPG yielded higher distance values (14.42 mm right, 14.27 mm left) compared to USG (14.12 mm right, 14.03 mm left) (p < 0.05). MF-mandibular bone distances were significantly greater in males than females (p < 0.01). USG is a valuable complementary tool in clinical practice.
trial registrationNot applicable. This study did not involve a health care intervention and was not a clinical trial.
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.