ArticleBMC oral health2026
Why was the concordance rate of imaging and clinical diagnosis in cemento-osseous dysplasia low? A retrospective study of 55 cases.
Article in BMC oral health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Failure rate and treatment plan options of dental implants in patients with fibro-osseous lesions: a systematic review.Maxillofacial plastic and reconstructive surgery · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe World Health Organization (WHO) recommends that cemento-osseous dysplasia (COD) be diagnosed based on imaging findings, avoiding biopsy when possible. This study aimed to evaluate the concordance between imaging and clinical diagnoses in 55 COD patients, and to identify key clinical and radiographic features that may help prevent unnecessary biopsy or inappropriate treatment.
methodsBetween September 1, 2017, and August 31, 2018, 55 patients diagnosed with COD were randomly selected from the imaging database of West China Hospital of Stomatology. Two radiologists reviewed all cases to assess correlations between COD variants and clinical symptoms, identify common misdiagnoses, and examine subsequent treatment decisions.
resultsThe cohort showed a strong female predominance (female: male = 48:7). The concordance rate between imaging and clinical diagnoses was only 1.8% (1/55); the remaining 98.2% were either misdiagnosed or overlooked clinically. Most lesions were incidentally discovered on radiographs (65%), while others were associated with tooth pain (18%), facial swelling (9%), tooth mobility (5%), or abscess (2%). A statistically significant difference was found between symptomatic and asymptomatic groups across COD variants (Fisher's Exact Test, P < 0.05; Cramer's V = 0.45, 95% CI: 0.28-0.67). Among 27 clinically overlooked cases, only one was correctly diagnosed. Misdiagnoses included tooth-related diseases (n = 10), tumors or cysts (n = 6), osteomyelitis (n = 3), bone islands (n = 1), and mixed diagnoses (n = 7). No significant differences were observed in COD variants, treatment duration, or the number of clinical visits and departments among the misdiagnosed cases. The only correctly diagnosed patient received surgical curettage. Twenty-two patients received no treatment. Others underwent root canal therapy, extraction, curettage, or combinations thereof. Some patients also received dental implants or orthodontic treatment.
conclusionCemento-osseous dysplasia (COD), a type of non-neoplastic fibro-osseous lesion of the jaw, is frequently misdiagnosed in clinical practice. These diagnostic errors often lead to unnecessary interventions and complications. Enhanced clinician training in radiographic interpretation-particularly the use of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT)-is essential for enhancing diagnostic accuracy and guiding appropriate management.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.