BMC Oral Health· 2026Q1
Diagnostic accuracy of a novel electronic device mode for detecting second mesiobuccal (MB2) canals in maxillary molars: an ex vivo study
- 0citations
- Q1SCImago
- 2026year
Short summary
A novel electronic device's Micro Hole Negotiator (MHN) mode showed limited ability to detect second mesiobuccal (MB2) canals in extracted maxillary molars, with accuracy of 59.9% and agreement with CBCT not exceeding chance (kappa = -0.089).
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Key points
- The Micro Hole Negotiator (MHN) mode showed limited ability to detect second mesiobuccal (MB2) canals in 162 extracted maxillary molars.
- At a threshold of ≥ 2, the MHN mode achieved 59.9% accuracy, with 87.0% sensitivity but only 5.6% specificity.
- Agreement between the MHN mode and CBCT (the reference standard) did not exceed chance, with kappa coefficients of -0.089 and -0.010.
- The study concludes that the MHN mode is not a reliable standalone diagnostic method for MB2 canal detection.
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Abstract
This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of the Micro Hole Negotiator (MHN) mode for detecting second mesiobuccal (MB2) canals, using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) as the reference standard. In this ex vivo study, 162 extracted maxillary molars were evaluated using the MHN mode by a single operator. MHN scores were categorized as absent (0–1), possibly present (2–3), or present (4–9). Associations between MHN score categories and CBCT findings were assessed using Pearson’s chi-square and linear-by-linear association tests. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), accuracy, and Cohen’s kappa coefficient were calculated at predefined thresholds of ≥ 2 and ≥ 4 (α = 0.05). ROC curve analysis was performed using the full MHN score range to assess overall discriminatory ability. CBCT identified MB2 canal in 108 teeth (66.7%). The MHN mode classified 17 specimens (10.5%) as absent, 23 (14.2%) as possibly present, and 122 (75.3%) as present. MHN categories were not associated with CBCT findings (χ 2 = 2.952; p = 0.229), and no linear trend was observed (χ 2 = 0.567; p = 0.451). At the ≥ 2 cutoff, sensitivity was 87.0%, specificity 5.6%, PPV 64.8%, NPV 17.6%, and accuracy 59.9%. At ≥ 4, sensitivity was 75.0%, specificity 24.1%, PPV 66.4%, NPV 32.5%, and accuracy 58.0%. Agreement with CBCT did not exceed chance at either cutoff (κ = − 0.089 and − 0.010, respectively). In this ex vivo model, the MHN mode demonstrated limited discriminatory ability for MB2 canal detection. Its low specificity and lack of agreement beyond chance with CBCT findings do not support its use as a reliable standalone diagnostic method. Whether MHN provides additional diagnostic value when combined with other canal-detection techniques remains to be established.
The authors' abstract, as published at the source. BMC Oral Health, 2026 · DOI ↗
Continue with a free account
Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.
Continue free on the webSign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.
On your phone:
Field: Oral Surgery
Oral SurgeryDentistry