ReviewJADA foundational science2025
The future of endodontic diagnosis: A narrative review focusing on biological markers.
Review in JADA foundational science, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Innovative methods for pulpal diagnosis are becoming increasingly important in endodontics, as traditional diagnostic techniques often lack the precision and reliability needed for confident decision making. Molecular diagnostic approaches, like biomarker analysis and advanced sampling methods, represent a step forward in clinical practice. This narrative review aims to identify key biomarkers associated with pulpal inflammation, compare published cutoff points for these biomarkers, and briefly review molecular methods and sampling techniques. Search Strategy: This study is a narrative review of literature identified by a web-based search on PubMed. Original scientific articles, such as clinical studies, reviews, and case reports, were included. Results: Several biomarkers have been associated with pulp inflammation and have been reported as statistically significant, including interleukin 1, 6, and 8; tumor necrosis factor-α; vascular endothelial growth factor; fibrocyte growth factor acidic; and matrix metalloproteinases 8 and 9. Although some cutoff points for these biomarkers have been identified, further research is necessary to refine their clinical applicability. Various sample collection methods, such as gingival crevicular fluid, dentinal fluid, pulpal tissue, and pulpal blood, have been used. Among the analytical techniques, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and Luminex protein assays have proven to be the most accurate, sensitive, and specific for evaluating pulpal inflammation.
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.