ArticleBMC oral health2026
Markerless augmented reality-guided endodontic microsurgery for improving accuracy and time efficiency in mandibular molar apical surgery: an in vitro study.
Article in BMC oral health, 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAugmented reality (AR) visualization projects preoperative virtual three-dimensional (3D) models onto real surgical sites and can provide intuitive intraoperative guidance. This in vitro proof-of-concept study evaluated the feasibility of markerless AR-guided endodontic microsurgery by comparing objective outcomes between AR guidance (ARG) and traditional freehand (FH) procedures on customized 3D-printed mandibular models.
methodsCustomized 3D dental models with artificial periapical lesions (APLs) were generated from cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) images obtained from one patient. A total of 20 dental models (80 mandibular molars and 160 APLs) were included, with 10 models assigned to the ARG group and 10 to the FH group. Surgical planning was performed on virtual models reconstructed from CBCT images. All procedures were performed by one endodontist with more than 10 years of clinical experience after standardized training in both workflows. Surgical time was recorded during each procedure, and postoperative CBCT images were acquired to evaluate bone window marking errors, osteotomy errors, and root resection angle error.
resultsThe ARG group required less time than the FH group across all four molar positions. Median (IQR) surgical times ranged from 3.72 (2.99-5.75) to 5.25 (4.58-6.56) min in the ARG group and from 7.02 (6.60-7.66) to 9.13 (8.28-9.75) min in the FH group (all P < 0.05). The ARG group also yielded lower median (IQR) values for bone window marking, osteotomy, and root-resection angle errors. Several tooth-specific comparisons reached statistical significance (P < 0.05).
conclusionsWithin the limitations of an in vitro proof-of-concept study, markerless AR guidance was feasible and was associated with improved accuracy and time efficiency during simulated mandibular molar endodontic microsurgery. Further clinical studies are required before routine clinical application.
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.