ArticleJournal of conservative dentistry and endodontics2026
Cone-beam computed tomographic analysis of dentinal wall thickness in the danger zone of the first and second mesiobuccal canals of maxillary first molars.
Article in Journal of conservative dentistry and endodontics, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: This study evaluated the dentin thickness at the furcation level and danger zone of the first and second mesiobuccal (MB1 and MB2) canals of maxillary first molars and determined the dentin thickness between genders and different age groups. Materials and Methods: One hundred cone-beam computed tomography images of maxillary first molars with MB2 canals were evaluated from radiology centers in Bangalore. Images were prepared using CS three-dimensional Imaging Software Version 3.8 (Carestream Dental India, Mumbai, India), with a field of view of 8 cm × 8 cm and resolution of 0.1 mm. Axial cross-sections of 0.1 mm thickness were examined at a distance of 1 mm at four different levels, at the level of the furcation, followed by 2 mm, 4 mm, and 6 mm below the furcation (×10, magnification). The distances from the center of the MB1 and MB2 canals to the nearest point on the distal surface of the mesiobuccal root were measured. Statistical Analysis: Student paired t-tests were used for statistical analysis. Results: The dentin thickness in the MB2 canal was significantly less than that in the MB1 canal in all samples at all levels ( Conclusions: Danger zone lies 4 mm from the furcation level for both MB1 and MB2 canals. Dentinal wall thickness at 4 mm below the furcation showed statistically significant differences with respect to both MB1 and MB2 canals in females and patients aged <40 years.
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.