ArticleProgress in orthodontics2026
Relationship between root formation progress of adjacent teeth and external root resorption associated with impacted maxillary canines: a retrospective cross-sectional CBCT study.
Article in Progress in orthodontics, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to clarify the involvement of the root formation stage and apical foramen diameter (AFD) of adjacent teeth in the occurrence of external root resorption (ERR) associated with impacted maxillary canines (IMCs), and to identify novel risk indicators for more accurate clinical prediction.
methodsForty patients with IMCs (58 canines) who underwent cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) between May 2017 and October 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. The developmental status was assessed using the root formation stage and AFD of the central incisor (U1), lateral incisor (U2), and first premolar (U4). Additionally, spatial factors, including inter-root distance and the 3D position of the IMC, were evaluated in relation to ERR.
resultsERR was detected in 72.5% of patients, affecting 37.1% of all examined adjacent teeth. Among the affected teeth, U2 showed the highest incidence (65.3%), followed by U1 (28.6%) and U4 (6.1%). In exploratory tooth-level comparisons, AFD was smaller in the ERR group for U1 and U4. In the supplementary affected-side-level mixed-effects analysis, no statistically significant independent association was demonstrated between maximum AFD and side-level ERR occurrence.
conclusionsDevelopmental indicators, including AFD, may provide clinically relevant information when assessing ERR associated with IMCs. These indicators should be interpreted as potential modifying factors in conjunction with established spatial relationships rather than as independent predictive markers.
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.