SynthesisClinical oral investigations2026
Recognition of giant cell arteritis and calcified carotid artery atheromas in dental practice: systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Clinical oral investigations, 2026. 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
objectiveGiant cell arteritis (GCA) is a granulomatous vasculitis affecting medium- and large-sized arteries, most commonly the temporal arteries. Delayed recognition can lead to severe complications, including irreversible vision loss and stroke. Dentists routinely obtain panoramic radiographs for dental assessment, where calcified carotid artery atheromas (CCAA) may appear as incidental findings in the cervical region. This study systematically evaluated the incidence of suspected CCAA detected on panoramic radiographs obtained for dental indications and considered the clinical relevance of these findings for dental practitioners.
methodsA systematic search of MEDLINE, PubMed, and Embase databases was conducted to identify studies reporting calcified carotid artery atheromas detected on panoramic radiographs. Study selection followed PRISMA guidelines. Observational studies reporting CCAA on panoramic radiographs were included. Data extraction was performed independently, and pooled incidence estimates were calculated using a random-effects meta-analysis.
resultsThirty-four cross-sectional studies met the inclusion criteria. The pooled incidence of suspected CCAA detected on panoramic radiographs was approximately 7% (95% CI 5-9%). Substantial heterogeneity was observed among studies. These findings indicate that incidental radiographic detection of cervical calcifications occurs in a measurable proportion of dental patients undergoing panoramic imaging.
conclusionsAlthough panoramic radiography is not a screening modality for carotid artery disease, dentists should recognize potential calcified carotid atheromas when interpreting images obtained for dental purposes. Identification of suspicious calcifications and appropriate referral for medical evaluation may support early assessment of patients with possible vascular risk factors. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Routine dental examinations and panoramic radiography may allow early risk identification, underscoring the importance of interdisciplinary collaboration.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41984118What 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.