SynthesisMedicina oral, patologia oral y cirugia bucal2026
Enamel pits and enamel developmental defects in tuberous sclerosis complex: A descriptive synthesis and pooled prevalence analysis.
Synthesis in Medicina oral, patologia oral y cirugia bucal, 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEnamel pits and enamel developmental defects have been reported in patients with tuberous sclerosis complex (TSC), but prevalence estimates and phenotypic descriptions vary widely. A standardized synthesis has been lacking. Recent updates in TSC clinical reviews and dermatologic-dental guidelines highlight the diagnostic relevance of subtle oral findings, underscoring the need for an updated synthesis. MATERIAL AND
methodsA systematic review with quantitative integration was conducted in accordance with PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Electronic databases were searched from inception to March 2026. Eligible studies reporting enamel pits or enamel developmental defects in TSC were reviewed, and pooled prevalence was calculated using a random‑effects model. Meta‑analytic procedures, including Forest and funnel plot generation, were performed using EZR (version 1.7). Heterogeneity was assessed using the I² statistic, and subgroup analyses explored sources of variability. A phenotype‑oriented classification system was developed based on recurring enamel features. Representative clinical cases were included only as qualitative supplementary material. Recent literature on TSC diagnostic criteria and enamel defects in systemic or dermatologic conditions was additionally incorporated to contextualize methodological variability.
resultsSeven studies involving 217 patients were included. Enamel pits and related defects were frequently reported. The pooled prevalence of enamel pits was 66%, with substantial heterogeneity (I²=77%). Individual estimates ranged from 0% in deciduous dentition to 100% in studies using staining or SEM. Funnel plot asymmetry suggested potential publication bias and small‑study effects. Variability was partly associated with dentition type, age, diagnostic criteria, and assessment methods. These findings align with contemporary evidence emphasizing that enamel abnormalities may be under‑recognized depending on examination methods and clinical context.
conclusionsThis review synthesizes current evidence on enamel abnormalities in TSC and highlights considerable variability in reported prevalence. The proposed phenotype‑oriented classification provides a pragmatic descriptive framework, but findings should be interpreted cautiously due to methodological heterogeneity. Contemporary literature supports the diagnostic relevance of enamel pits as a recognized minor feature of TSC, reinforcing the need for standardized assessment.
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.