ArticlePloS one2018
Biomechanical simulation of correcting primary unilateral cleft lip nasal deformity.
Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Finite Element Analysis in Cleft Lip Nasal Deformity: A Narrative Review from Biomechanical Insights to Clinical Translation.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2026Review
- Double Reinforcing Strategy with Perpendicular Plate of Ethmoid in Asian Secondary Unilateral Cleft Rhinoplasty: A Finite Element Analysis.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2024Article
- ChatGPT for shaping the future of dentistry: the potential of multi-modal large language model.International journal of oral science · 2023Review
- An anatomical composite nasal lining subunit technique in primary cleft nose correction.JPRAS open · 2021Article
- Computational technology for nasal cartilage-related clinical research and application.International journal of oral science · 2020Review
- Biomechanical analyses of common suspension sutures in primary cleft lip rhinoplasty.Head & face medicine · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
For better outcomes of the primary correction of cleft lip nasal deformity, it is important to clarify the specific morphological and biomechanical consequences of major surgical maneuvers during cleft lip nose correction. In this study, a finite element model was established basing on the micro-MRI imaging of an infant specimen with unilateral complete cleft lip deformity. Alar base adduction was simulated as a medially-directed force on the lateral crus (F1); columella straightening was simulated as a laterally-directed force on the medial crus (F2); and nasal tip enhancement was simulated as an anteriorly-directed force on the intermediate crus (F3). The deformation and stress distribution consequent to each force vector or different force combinations were analyzed in details. Our biomechnical analyses suggested that W\when loaded alone, the three forces generated disparate morphological changes. The combination of different force loadings generated obviously different outcomes. F3 generated the most intensive stress when compared to F1 and F2. When F2 was loaded on top of F1-F3 combination, it further relieved nasal deviation without incurring significant increase in stress. Our simulation suggested that alar base adduction, columella straightening, and nasal tip elevation should all be included in a competent cleft lip nose correction.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.