ReviewJournal of clinical and experimental dentistry2025
Anatomical Variations of the Mandibular Buccal Shelf According to Sex, Facial Biotype, and Root Reference: A CBCT Study.
Review in Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: To evaluate, through cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT), the anatomical characteristics of the mandibular buccal shelf according to sex, facial biotype, hemiarch, and reference root, in order to determine bone availability for orthodontic mini-implant placement. Material and Methods: A cross-sectional observational study was conducted on 60 CBCT scans (480 roots) of patients aged 12-53 years. Measurements of angulation, horizontal bone thickness (4 mm and 6 mm), and vertical bone height (6 mm and 11 mm) were obtained at the mesial and distal roots of the mandibular first and second molars. Statistical analyses included t-test and one-way ANOVA (p < 0.05). Results: The distal root of the mandibular second molar exhibited the highest bone dimensions (angulation 37°, horizontal thickness 17.3 mm at 4 mm and 10.0 mm at 6 mm, vertical height 5.4 mm at 6 mm and 6.7 mm at 11 mm), establishing it as the most favorable insertion site. In contrast, the mesial root of the first molar showed the lowest values. Sex-related analysis revealed slightly greater dimensions in males, with significant differences in horizontal thickness at 4 mm and vertical height at 11 mm (p = 0.05). No statistically significant differences were observed among facial biotypes or between hemiarches, although brachyfacial patients consistently showed the highest averages. Conclusions: The distal root of the mandibular second molar represents the most reliable anatomical site for mini-implant placement in the buccal shelf, regardless of sex or facial growth pattern. CBCT assessment remains essential for individualized planning and to minimize complications.
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.