Pulp canal obliteration after replantation of avulsed immature teeth: a systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Avulsion of permanent teeth is one of the most serious dento-alveolar traumatic injuries. Pulp canal obliteration (PCO) is one of the consequences after replantation of avulsed immature teeth. The aim of this systematic review was to determine when calcification following replantation of an avulsed immature tooth begins and to evaluate the prevalence of PCO in these cases. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Electronic database MEDLINE via Ovid, PubMed, Cochrane, and Web of science databases were searched. Hand searching was performed through reference lists of endodontic and trauma textbooks, endodontic and trauma-related journals, and relevant articles from electronic searching. Pooled data from the selected articles were analyzed for prevalence of healing and PCO as well as mean first evidence of PCO. RESULTS: Pulp healing after replantation of immature teeth occurred in 32.9%, while pulpal necrosis occurred in 67.1% of teeth. PCO was the most frequent outcome of pulpal healing as it occurred in 96% of healed pulps. First evidence of obliteration was observed from 3 to 14 months with mean time of 9.5 months (95% CI = 4.5-14.5 months). CONCLUSIONS: PCO is considered the mechanism by which the pulp heals after replantation of avulsed immature permanent teeth. PCO is very fast and can be recognized radiographically during the first year from the onset of the trauma.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".