Evidence Hub

Clinicopathological features of the nasopalatine duct cyst: A systematic review

Soares AC, Braz GL, Dos Santos Figueiredo A, Calderipe CB, Carvalho FSR, Costa FWG, Uchoa Vasconcelos AC

Oral and maxillofacial surgery, 2026

1,641 participants

Abstract

PURPOSE: This systematic review aimed to synthesize the available clinicopathological data on nasopalatine duct cyst (NPDC). METHODS: Electronic searches were performed in seven databases and the grey literature, according to the PRISMA 2020 statement. Risk of bias was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tool. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: A total of 168 studies comprising 2,734 NPDC cases were included. Most lesions were asymptomatic (n = 358/54.16%) and occurred in males (n = 1641/60.75%), with individuals in the fourth and fifth decade of life being the most frequently affected. Periapical radiographs (n = 181/40.31%) and computed tomography scan (n = 159/35.41%) were the most commonly used imaging modalities. Metaplasia (n = 278/58.28%) was observed in most cases with a predominance of combinations involving stratified squamous epithelium and pseudostratified ciliated columnar epithelium (n = 78/47.27%). The periapical cyst was the second most frequent clinical diagnostic hypothesis. Enucleation was the preferred treatment modality (n = 544/95.94%), and recurrence was absent in most cases (n = 375/93.05%). CONCLUSION: NPDC is a benign lesion with a heterogeneous clinical presentation and a low recurrence rate. Its anatomical location frequently results in diagnostic overlap with odontogenic lesions, particularly periapical chronic lesions. Clinicians should be aware of its clinicopathological features and integrate…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 1,641 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free