Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39371310›Full record

ArticleImaging science in dentistry2024

Opportunistic investigation of vascular calcification using 3-dimensional dental imaging.

Masoud MiriMoghaddam, Hollis Lai, Camila Pacheco-Pereira

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Imaging science in dentistry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Masoud MiriMoghaddamFaculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2631-6156
Hollis LaiFaculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5531-6622
Camila Pacheco-PereiraFaculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5071-4720

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: Given the growing use of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans, this study assessed radiation exposure from these scans in the context of national guidelines and recommended dose limits. Materials and Methods: The current literature was reviewed to quantify the benefit of opportunistic diagnosis of carotid artery calcification relative to the potential risk of radiation-induced cancer. Results: The average radiation from CBCT at its largest field of view and highest resolution possible amounts to a reasonable but still low ionizing radiation exposure. This exposure is comparable to 22 days of background radiation and is notably lower than the radiation exposure from medical CT scans. According to the risk assessment analysis, the risk of stroke events involving internal and external carotid artery calcification (CAC) was 202 and 67 per 100,000 individuals, respectively. In contrast, the estimated risk of radiation-induced cancer associated with CBCT was notably lower, at 0.6 per 100,000. Conclusion: The present study advocates for a comprehensive assessment of CBCT scans encompassing the areas of the internal and external carotid arteries by a knowledgeable professional, given the potential advantages of early detection of vascular abnormalities. Dental professionals who take scans involving these areas need to be mindful of reporting these findings and refer patients to their primary care physician for further investigation.

Indexed as

Carotid Artery DiseasesCone-beam Computed TomographyIncidental FindingsIonizing Radiation

Identifiers

PMID39371310
PMCPMC11450408

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.