ArticleThe Journal of international medical research2023
Comparative analysis of three common imaging modalities for nasolabial cysts.
Article in The Journal of international medical research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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.
- Article
- A nasolabial cyst is It a rare cyst or not? case series of bilateral and unilateral patterns.Frontiers in oral health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the clinical diagnostic value of ultrasonography (USG), computed tomography (CT), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for nasolabial cysts.
methodsThe clinical and imaging data of 20 patients with 21 nasolabial cysts confirmed surgically and histopathologically were retrospectively analyzed.
resultsThe largest cyst was 3.4 × 2.7 × 2.3 cm, and the smallest cyst was 1.1 × 0.7 × 0.5 cm. All cysts were located in the soft tissue between the nasolabial fold and maxillary bone. USG showed sensitivity of 95%, accuracy of 95%, and a missed diagnosis rate of 5%; CT showed sensitivity of 80%, accuracy of 80%, and a missed diagnosis rate of 20%; and MRI showed sensitivity of 85%, accuracy of 85%, and a missed diagnosis rate of 15%.
conclusionsUSG showed higher sensitivity and accuracy and a lower missed diagnosis rate than CT and MRI. Therefore, USG is worth popularizing on a large scale for the diagnosis of nasolabial cysts.
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.