ReviewEvidence-based dentistry2021
Three-dimensional nasolabial changes after maxillary advancement osteotomy in class III individuals: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Evidence-based dentistry, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cone-Beam Computed Tomography-Based Three-Dimensional Phenotypes of Skeletal Class II Malocclusion in Yemeni Adults: A Principal Component and Cluster Analysis.International dental journal · 2026Observational
- Factors affecting postoperative nasal morphology after Le Fort I osteotomy on multiple regression analysis.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Class III malocclusions with maxillary retrognathia are commonly treated with single jaw Le Fort I maxillary advancement. The three-dimensional (3D) effects of surgery on the nasolabial region varies among the clinical studies. Quantifying these changes is of great importance for surgical planning and obtaining valid consent. Objectives To investigate the 3D relationship between soft tissue and skeletal changes secondary to Le Fort I maxillary advancement surgery in skeletal class III patients.Search methods Comprehensive search of multiple electronic databases supplemented by a manual and grey literature search were undertaken from inception to 9 June 2020.Selection criteria Studies that evaluated the 3D soft tissue changes of patients before and after maxillary advancement surgery alone.Data collection and analysis Study selection, data extraction and risk of bias assessment were performed independently by two reviewers, with disputes resolved by a third reviewer. A quantitative synthesis of the data was pre-planned for pooling similar outcome measures.Results Four studies were included in the final review and meta-analysis, with a total of 105 patients (mean age 16.7 + 33.9 years). The mean maxillary advancement of the included studies was 5.58 mm (95% CI 5.20-5.96). The sagittal effects of surgery on nose tip projection and prominence were insignificant (P >0.05, two studies); however, subnasal projection (MD 1.7 mm, two studies) and upper lip projection (MD 2.90 mm, four studies) increased significantly in a forward direction after surgery (P <0.05). Le Fort I osteotomy widens the upper philtrum width (MD 0.84 mm, two studies) (P <0.05). Inconsistencies among the included studies were identified; therefore, the results should be interpreted with caution.Conclusions There is weak evidence based on quantitative assessments that Le Fort I maxillary advancement significantly affects the nasolabial soft tissue envelope mainly in a sagittal dimension. These changes are concentrated around the central zone of the nasolabial region. Future prospective studies on maxillary advancement osteotomy with a standardised method of assessment, taking into consideration the confounding factors, are required.
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.