ArticleHeliyon2024
Assessment of unilateral condylar hyperplasia with quantitative SPECT/CT.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Growth Prediction in Orthodontics: ASystematic Review of Past Methods up to Artificial Intelligence.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Diagnostic Efficacy of Bone SPECT Techniques in Differentiating Unilateral and Bilateral Condylar Hyperplasia.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Unilateral "Inactive" Condylar Hyperplasia: New Histological Data.Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: The current study aimedto assess condylar activityin patients with unilateral condylar hyperplasia (UCH) with quantitative SPECT/CT. Patients and methods: This retrospective study included patients with UCH who underwent quantitative SPECT/CT. SPECT analysis and quantification of SPECT/CT were performed, and the maximum count per pixel and SUVmax of either side of the condyles were calculated. Results: 39 patients were included in the analysisand classified into three subgroups according to the percentile differential right-left ratio: inactive group, left active (LA) group, and right active (RA) group. Totally, the SUVmax of the affected side is significantly higher than the unaffected side (active:5.93 ± 2.43 vs inactive:3.62 ± 1.76, P < 0.001), SUVmax-based ratios correlated well with the ratios based on maximum count (R = 0.944, P < 0.001). ROC analysis showed poorSUVmaxperformance in differentiation between theactive condyles and the inactive condyles due to the lower area under the curve (AUC) (0.588). In subgroup analysis, the affected side is significantly higher than the unaffected side in active groups with SUVmax, no significant difference was found between the active sides or the inactive sides of active groups. Interestingly, the SUVmax of the left side was statistically higher than that of the right sidein the inactive group (P = 0.01),while the left side of the right active group has significantlylower activitythan that in the inactive group, meanwhile,the right side showed no significant difference. Furthermore, each side showed no significant difference between the left active group and the inactive group. Conclusions: SUVmax is not an optimal measurement effectively used to evaluate active condyles. However, SUV ratios correlated well with the count ratios, and the left side of condyles showed a peculiar feature in condyle growth status reflected in radioactivity quantified with SPECT/CT, which needs further study to determine the role in the development of the UCH.
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.