ArticleInternational dental journal2026
Anatomical Predictors of Second Molar External Root Resorption: A Cone-Beam Computed Tomography Study of Impacted Third Molars.
Article in International dental journal, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study aimed to identify anatomical and radiographic risk factors associated with second molar (M2) external root resorption (ERR) induced by impacted third molars (M3) using cone-beam computed tomography, providing a strategic framework for clinical decision-making regarding prophylactic extraction.
methodsA retrospective analysis was conducted on cone-beam computed tomography scans of 513 impacted M3s. Anatomical parameters, including M3 angulation, impaction depth (Pell and Gregory classification), and skeletal constraints (M3 to the posterior border of the maxilla, distance from the M3 root to the posterior border of the mandible, etc.) were quantified. The severity and anatomical location of M2 ERR were evaluated using stratified statistical methods to identify key predictors of resorption.
resultsIn the univariate analysis, M2 ERR severity was significantly associated with M3 impaction depth and skeletal space constraints rather than angulation alone (P < .05). Class C impaction with apical-third involvement represented the highest risk profile; notably, 100% of severe maxillary ERR cases were localized to the M2 apical third. In the multivariate model, an increased distance from the M3 to the posterior border of the maxilla (OR = 1.26) and a reduced cervical width of the M2 were key predictors of severity. Furthermore, a distinct sexual dimorphism was observed, with female patients exhibiting a significantly higher prevalence of severe maxillary ERR, likely due to more restricted skeletal space.
conclusionsThe severity of M2 ERR is primarily driven by impaction depth and anatomical constraints, particularly the limited space in the maxillary tuberosity and mandibular retromolar area. Class C impaction targeting the M2 apical third is the most critical risk factor for severe resorption. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Clinicians should consider a proactive management strategy, prioritizing preventive M3 extraction in high-risk cases - specifically Class C impactions in female patients - to avoid irreversible pulp involvement and potential M2 loss. These findings support shifting from passive observation to early intervention based on specific anatomical risk profiles.
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.