Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31463681›Full record

SynthesisSurgical and radiologic anatomy : SRA2020

Prevalence, morphology, and morphometry of the pterygospinous bar: a meta-analysis.

Brandon Michael Henry, Przemysław A Pękala, Paulina A Frączek, Jakub R Pękala, Konstantinos Natsis, Maria Piagkou, Krzysztof A Tomaszewski, Iwona M Tomaszewska

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisReview
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Surgical and radiologic anatomy : SRA, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Brandon Michael HenryDepartment of Anatomy, Jagiellonian University Medical College, International Evidence-Based Anatomy Working Group, 12 Kopernika St, 31-034, Kraków, Poland.
Przemysław A PękalaDepartment of Anatomy, Jagiellonian University Medical College, International Evidence-Based Anatomy Working Group, 12 Kopernika St, 31-034, Kraków, Poland.
Paulina A FrączekDepartment of Anatomy, Jagiellonian University Medical College, International Evidence-Based Anatomy Working Group, 12 Kopernika St, 31-034, Kraków, Poland. paulinafraczek2@gmail.com.
Jakub R PękalaDepartment of Anatomy, Jagiellonian University Medical College, International Evidence-Based Anatomy Working Group, 12 Kopernika St, 31-034, Kraków, Poland.
Konstantinos NatsisDepartment of Anatomy and Surgical Anatomy, Faculty of Health Sciences, School of Medicine, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, P.O. Box 300, 54124, Thessaloniki, Greece.
Maria PiagkouDepartment of Anatomy, School of Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, 157 72, Athens, Greece.
Krzysztof A TomaszewskiDepartment of Anatomy, Jagiellonian University Medical College, International Evidence-Based Anatomy Working Group, 12 Kopernika St, 31-034, Kraków, Poland.
Iwona M TomaszewskaDepartment of Medical Education, Jagiellonian University Medical College, 16 św. Łazarza St, 31-530, Kraków, Poland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe purpose of the study was to analyze the total prevalence, morphologic, and morphometric characteristics of the pterygospinous (PS) bar and its gender and ethnic differences among populations. PS bar is an ossified anatomic structure stretching between the posterior margin of the lateral pterygoid lamina to the angular spine of the undersurface of the sphenoid, with potential clinical implications. There is no consensus in the literature on its prevalence, morphologic, and morphometric characteristics.

methodsA thorough search of databases was conducted. Data on the prevalence, morphology, i.e., ossification type (complete and incomplete), side, gender, laterality, and morphometrics, of the PS bar were extracted and pooled into a meta-analysis.

resultsA total of 35 studies (n = 14,047 subjects) were analyzed. The overall pooled prevalence of a complete PS bar was 4.4% (95% CI 3.7-5.1), while the overall pooled prevalence of an incomplete PS bar was significantly higher (11.6% [95% CI 8.5-15.2]). A complete PS bar was more prevalent among males and was more commonly unilaterally, on the left side.

conclusionThe overall prevalence of PS bar is quite common. It could be of importance for clinicians who should consider its potential presence when planning surgical approaches to the retropharyngeal and parapharyngeal space.

Indexed as

FemaleHumansLigamentsMaleOssification, HeterotopicPrevalencePterygoid MusclesSex FactorsSphenoid BoneCivinini’s foramenOssified ligamentPterygospinous barPterygospinous foramen

Identifiers

PMID31463681
PMCPMC7096365

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.