Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38178180›Full record

ArticleBMC oral health2024

Role of finite element analysis for selection of single point fixation in zygomaticomaxillary complex fracture.

Shaimaa Mohsen Refahee, Mahmoud Elsayed Khalifa, Mohamed Gamal Askar, Maram N Breshah

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC oral health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05819372 (Role of Finite Element Analysis for Selection of Single Point Fixation in Zygomaticomaxillary Complex Fracture), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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.

NCT05819372 nacompletednot on this map

Role of Finite Element Analysis for Selection of Single Point Fixation in Zygomaticomaxillary Complex Fracture

TypeinterventionalSponsorFayoum UniversityRan2023 to 2023Enrolled1ConditionsZygomaticomaxillary Complex FractureArmsZygomaticomaxillary fracture repair
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Observational
  3. 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

4 authors.

Shaimaa Mohsen RefaheeOral & Maxillofacial Surgery Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Fayoum University, Fayoum, Egypt. smr11@fayoum.edu.eg.ORCID 0000-0002-7550-1913
Mahmoud Elsayed KhalifaOral & Maxillofacial Surgery Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Tanta University, Tanta, Egypt.
Mohamed Gamal AskarMechanical Power Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering, Helwan University, Cairo, Egypt.ORCID 0009-0007-6361-9301
Maram N BreshahOral & Maxillofacial Surgery Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Tanta University, Tanta, Egypt.ORCID 0009-0003-3753-1905

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOne-point fixation was superior to the two and three-points fixation in minimally displaced zygomaticomaxillary complex (ZMC) fracture regarding the cost, invasiveness, scaring, number of wounds, and operation time. Accordingly, this study aimed to predict which one-point fixation is the most stable in managing minimally displaced ZMC fracture. MATERIAL &

methodsThis study simulated the different one-point fixation approaches on three ZMC models after fracture reduction and application of all forces exerted on the fractured area. The findings were represented as stress impact on the ZMC fracture and plating system as well as the inter-fragments micro-motion.

resultsThe von misses stresses of plates for the zygomaticofrontal, infra-orbital rim, and zygomaticomaxillary buttress model were (66.508, 1.285, and1.16 MPa) respectively. While the screws' von misses for the infraorbital rim, zygomaticofrontal, and zygomaticomaxillary buttress models were (13.8, 4.05, and 1.60 MPa) respectively. Whereas, the maximum principles stress at zygomaticofrontal, zygomaticomaxillary buttress, and infraorbital rim models were (37.03, 37.01, and 34.46 MPa) respectively. In addition, the inter-fragment micro-motion for zygomaticomaxillary buttress, infraorbital rim, and zygomaticofrontal models were (0.26, 0.25, and 0.15 mm) respectively.

conclusionOne-point fixation at zygomaticomaxillary buttress is the preferred point because it is exposed to low stresses, and the inter-fragment micro-motion is within the approved limit with the elements in the same direction of fixation which indicates the rigid fixation. In addition, it is less palpable and scarless.

trial registrationclinical trial.gov (NCT05819372) at 19/04/2023.

Indexed as

Maxillary FracturesZygomatic FracturesFinite Element AnalysisFracture Fixation, InternalHumansTomography, X-Ray ComputedFinite element analysisFixationStabilityZygomaZygomaticomaxillary complex

Identifiers

PMID38178180
PMCPMC10768277

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.