Prognosis and complications of immature teeth following lateral luxation: A systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIMS: Lateral luxation injuries are a type of traumatic dental injury in which the tooth becomes displaced in the palatal/lingual or labial direction. This injury is common among children and can result in pulp canal obliteration or pulp necrosis. The objective of this systematic review was to gather existing data on lateral luxation injuries to immature teeth to evaluate their overall prognosis. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted using Medline, Pubmed, Scopus, Lilacs, EMBASE and Cochrane databases in October 2017. Reference lists were also hand-searched to identify additional literature. Prospective and retrospective observational studies were included. A total of 502 articles were screened and six articles were included in the study. RESULTS: Pulp canal obliteration was the most frequent complication of immature teeth with lateral luxation (31.3%). This was followed by pulp necrosis (17.5%), inflammatory resorption (5.7%), and surface resorption (3.2%). Due to the heterogeneity of the studies, a meta-analysis was not attempted. There was great variation in the reported outcomes among the studies. CONCLUSION: Accurate prognosis evaluation of traumatic dental injuries is difficult due to the nature of current studies being retrospective or prospective cohort studies. Lateral luxation is a common traumatic dental injury and has life-long concerns for a patient. It is important for future studies to report on the same outcomes to increase the quality of evidence regarding prognosis and treatment interventions, not only for lateral luxation injuries, but for all traumatic dental injuries.
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 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 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".