ReviewCureus2026
Root Resection: Key Updates and a Review of the Literature.
Review in Cureus, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Root resective therapy remains a valuable but technique-sensitive treatment modality aimed at preserving multi-rooted teeth with severe periodontal or endodontic involvement. This review summarizes key updates in root resection, including its historical context, indications and contraindications, and evolving clinical approaches. Evidence demonstrates that both conventional root resection, often preceded by endodontic therapy, and vital root resection, performed prior to or without root canal treatment, can achieve favourable outcomes under specific conditions. Surgical techniques such as presurgical crown contouring and the vertical cut method offer distinct advantages, though direct comparative studies remain limited. Diagnostic challenges, such as assessing furcation involvement, have prompted refinement of classification systems and integration of advanced imaging modalities such as cone-beam computed tomography, which improve accuracy but carry higher costs and radiation exposure. Long-term survival rates of resected teeth vary widely, reflecting the importance of case selection, surgical proficiency, and supportive care. While extraction and implant placement are the most common treatments today, with the given indications, root resection provides the unique benefit of preserving natural dentition, underscoring its role as a last-resort but meaningful option in modern dentistry. Further standardized, long-term clinical trials are needed to clarify prognostic factors and optimize outcomes.
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.