ArticleOral radiology2022
A comparative study on cephalometric differences in maxillofacial morphology between skeletal Class III cases with and without acromegaly: a pilot study.
Article in Oral radiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe most typical maxillofacial feature of patients with acromegaly is mandibular protrusion. This study aimed to determine differences in maxillofacial morphology between skeletal Class III patients with and without acromegaly using cephalometric analysis.
methodsCephalograms of 37 patients with acromegaly (Acro), 37 age-matched non-acromegalic patients with skeletal Class III malocclusion (C-III), and 37 age-matched Class I malocclusion patients (C-I; control) were retrospectively collected. The skeletal and dental morphology of each group was analyzed using cephalometric analysis, which included linear and angular measurements and facial profilograms. In addition, we analyzed diagnostic performance and cutoff values for discriminating acromegaly from skeletal Class III malocclusion using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis.
resultsThe mandibular ramus height was larger in the Acro group than in the other groups. The increase in L1/MP in the Acro group, which represented labial inclination of the mandibular central incisors, was the most characteristic feature in this study. ROC curve analysis indicated that a cutoff value of 88.4° for L1/MP had the highest diagnostic performance in discriminating acromegaly from non-acromegalic Class III malocclusion.
conclusionsAcromegaly was characterized by a greater degree of bimaxillary prognathism than was non-acromegalic Class III malocclusion. Focusing on labial inclination of the mandibular central incisors would be the most useful way to differentiate acromegaly from non-acromegalic Class III malocclusion.
Indexed as
Identifiers
34245408What 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.