ArticleScientific reports2020
Outcome of facial contour asymmetry after conventional two-dimensional versus computer-assisted three-dimensional planning in cleft orthognathic surgery.
Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Establishment of the mid-sagittal reference plane for three-dimensional assessment of facial asymmetry: a systematic review : Establishment of the mid-sagittal reference plane: a systematic review.Clinical oral investigations · 2024Pooled it
- Skeletal Characteristics and Clinical Treatment Patterns in Orthognathic Surgery: A Virtual Surgical Planning-Based Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Virtual Surgical Planning (VSP) in Orthognathic Surgery for Non-Syndromic Cleft Patients: A Scoping Review of Trends and Clinical Outcomes.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Precision and Efficacy of Digital Technology in Orthognathic Surgery for Facial Asymmetry Correction: A Quantitative Analysis.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2025Article
- Evaluating Virtual Planning Accuracy in Bimaxillary Advancement Surgery: A Retrospective Study Introducing the Planning Accuracy Coefficient.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Article
- Treatment outcome and long-term stability of orthognathic surgery for facial asymmetry: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Korean journal of orthodontics · 2024Article
- 3D facial mask for facial asymmetry diagnosis.Heliyon · 2024Article
- Construction of a virtual reality platform for computer-aided navigation Lingnan bone setting technique.Bioengineered · 2023Article
- Anterior cerebral falx plane in MR images to estimate the craniofacial midline.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Orthognathic surgery with iliac bone grafting for an interpositional gap in a patient with type III hemifacial microsomia: A case report.JPRAS open · 2023Article
- Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate Has Asymmetry of Bony Orbits: A Retrospective Study.Journal of personalized medicine · 2023Article
- Palatal asymmetry assessed by intraoral scans: effects of sex, orthodontic treatment, and twinning. A retrospective cohort study.BMC oral health · 2023Article
- Managing Predicted Post-Orthognathic Surgical Defects Using Combined Digital Software: A Case Report.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Current trends in orthognathic surgery.Archives of craniofacial surgery · 2021Article
- Predictability of maxillary positioning: a 3D comparison of virtual and conventional orthognathic surgery planning.Head & face medicine · 2021Observational
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Computer-assisted 3D planning has overcome the limitations of conventional 2D planning-guided orthognathic surgery (OGS), but difference for facial contour asymmetry outcome has not been verified to date. This comparative study assessed the facial contour asymmetry outcome of consecutive patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate who underwent 2D planning (n = 37)- or 3D simulation (n = 38)-guided OGS treatment for correction of maxillary hypoplasia and skeletal Class III malocclusion between 2010 and 2018. Normal age-, gender-, and ethnicity-matched individuals (n = 60) were enrolled for comparative analyses. 2D (n = 60, with 30 images for each group) and 3D (n = 43, with 18 and 25 images for 2D planning and 3D simulation groups, respectively) photogrammetric-based facial contour asymmetry-related measurements were collected from patients and normal individuals. The facial asymmetry was further verified by using subjective perception of a panel composed of 6 blinded raters. On average, the facial contour asymmetry was significantly (all p < 0.05) reduced after 3D virtual surgery planning for all tested parameters, with no significant differences between post-OGS 3D simulation-related values and normal individuals. No significant differences were observed for pre- and post-OGS values in conventional 2D planning-based treatment, with significant (all p < 0.05) differences for all normal individuals-related comparisons. This study suggests that 3D planning presents superior facial contour asymmetry outcome than 2D planning.
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.