ArticleClinical oral investigations2025
Clinical efficacy of regenerative endodontic treatment in immature permanent teeth with trauma or dens evaginatus: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 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
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to assess the clinical efficacy of regenerative endodontic treatment (RET) for immature permanent teeth with pulp necrosis and apical periodontitis due to trauma or dens evaginatus, and to analyze the factors influencing the success rate of RET. MATERIALS AND
methodsA total of 140 immature permanent teeth were enrolled, including 70 traumatized anterior teeth and 70 premolars with dens evaginatus. Patient outcomes were evaluated based on clinical symptoms, complications, and radiographic findings. The primary outcome was the success rate defined by American Association of Endodontists (AAE). Differences between groups were analyzed using t-tests and Fisher’s exact test, and binary logistic regression was applied to determine factors affecting the success rate in the trauma group.
resultsAfter a mean follow-up period of (29.12 ± 16.59) months, the trauma group demonstrated a significantly lower success rate compared to the dens evaginatus group (T: 81.43% vs. D: 94.29%, p < 0.05). Statistically significant differences were also observed in periapical radiolucency (T: 85.71% vs. D: 97.14%, p < 0.05), root resorption (T: 17.14% vs. D: 1.43%, p < 0.05), root development type II (T: 21.43% vs. D: 7.14%, p < 0.05), and type III (T: 4.29% vs. D: 14.29%, p < 0.05), apical foramen diameter changes (T: 45.93 ± 29.41% vs. D: 58.53 ± 39.23%, p < 0.01), and root canal area changes (T: 37.87 ± 29.72% vs. D: 26.75 ± 22.71%, p < 0.05).
conclusionsWithin the limitation of this study, regenerative endodontic treatment demonstrates a considerable success rate managing immature teeth with pulp necrosis or apical periodontitis. Etiology appears to affect the RET outcomes, with traumatized anterior teeth associated with less favorable clinical results compared to dens evaginatus cases. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The findings highlight that etiology is a critical determinant of RET outcomes. This study lays the foundation for future research to investigate the underlying mechanisms responsible for the observed disparities between traumatic and dens evaginatus cases.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41345338What 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.