ArticleAnnals of medicine and surgery (2012)2026
Long-term outcomes of two surgical protocols for the autotransplantation of mandibular third molars: a randomized controlled trial.
Article in Annals of medicine and surgery (2012), 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This randomized clinical trial aimed to compare the mid-term (5-year) prognosis of mandibular third molar autotransplantation between two surgical protocols: conventional autotransplantation and immediate pulpectomy autotransplantation. Materials and Methods: Forty patients with unrestorable molars and suitable impacted third molars were randomized into two equal groups. Group I ( Results: The overall 5-year survival rate was 92.5%. Survival was 95% in the conventional autotransplantation group and 90% in the immediate pulpectomy autotransplantation group, with no statistically significant difference (log-rank test, Conclusion: Autotransplantation of mandibular third molars demonstrates excellent 5-year survival. Selecting between conventional autotransplantation and immediate pulpectomy autotransplantation. involves a clinical balance. Immediate autotransplantation preserves periodontal ligament vitality but may necessitate later endodontic treatment, whereas prior pulpectomy ensures endodontic stability. Both approaches are clinically sound, and the decision can be individualized according to surgical conditions without affecting mid-term survival.
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.