ReviewClinical oral investigations2026
Cracked teeth: a review of etiology, traditional detection methods, and novel diagnostic techniques.
Review 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveCracked teeth are a common oral disease that often causes tooth pain. However, its clinical manifestations are subtle and complex, leading to difficulties in early diagnosis, and current detection methods also have several limitations. Therefore, this review systematically summarizes emerging detection techniques, aiming to overcome existing diagnostic challenges and promote the advancement of rapid, precise, and non-invasive diagnostic approaches for cracked teeth. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis review is based on a systematic search of relevant data from databases including PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science covering the period from the January 2015 to December 2025, and also incorporates content from authoritative literature such as that of the American Association of Endodontists (AAE).
resultsIt summarizes common clinical detection methods for cracked teeth and focuses on delineating novel examination techniques and recent advances in this field.
conclusionCurrent clinical diagnosis primarily relies on visual examination with optical microscopy, supplemented by probing, bite tests, and imaging aids like periapical radiographs (PA) or cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). However, these conventional methods have several limitations, including heavy reliance on clinician experience, susceptibility to interference from metallic restorations, and difficulty in accurately assessing crack depth. With advancements in novel detection technologies, the localization and diagnosis of cracked teeth are becoming more precise. These new techniques not only effectively overcome artifacts caused by metallic restorations but also enable the evaluation of crack depth. Furthermore, they can facilitate automated crack identification and pulpal status assessment. In recent years, the integration of artificial intelligence with diagnostic methods for cracked teeth has been explored, aiming to develop rapid, accurate, and non-invasive diagnostic strategies. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This review systematically summarizes emerging detection technologies, highlighting their features and current limitations. It aims to provide new perspectives for the clinical diagnosis of cracked teeth and contribute to refining the existing clinical diagnostic framework.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42043600What 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.