ReviewCureus2026
Coronectomy Versus Total Extraction for Third Molar Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Cureus, 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Surgical extraction of impacted mandibular third molars near the inferior alveolar nerve (IAN) carries a risk of neurosensory injury. Coronectomy (intentional partial odontectomy) is a neuroprotective alternative, but concerns regarding long-term complications like root migration and the necessity for re-operation persist. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluates the comparative safety and efficacy of coronectomy versus total surgical extraction. A literature search was conducted across PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective cohort studies comparing coronectomy to total extraction in high-risk lower third molars. Primary outcomes included IAN injury, dry socket, and infection. Secondary outcomes included pain, root migration, and re-operation rates. Data were pooled using random-effects models (REML) with Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman adjustment. Trial sequential analysis (TSA) was performed for the primary outcome. The certainty of evidence was assessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE). Eight studies (three RCTs, five cohorts) comprising 1,488 teeth were included. Coronectomy significantly reduced the risk of IAN injury compared to total extraction (Peto OR 0.23, 95% CI (0.13, 0.39),
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.