ArticleCureus2023
A Comparison of Self-Perceived Oral and Facial Esthetics in Patients After Lip Repositioning Surgery With Modified and Conventional Techniques.
Article in Cureus, 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Review of Current Techniques in Lip Reposition Surgery for Treating Excessive Gingival Display.Cureus · 2024Review
- Esthetic Crown Lengthening Associated With Modified Lip Repositioning Surgery (Modified LipStat) in the Treatment of Excessive Gingival Display: A 6-Year Follow-Up Case Report.Case reports in dentistry · 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
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatients with excessive gingival display (EGD) are treated with lip repositioning surgeries (LRS). This study used a questionnaire to analyze and evaluate how patients who received LRS with modified and traditional techniques perceived their own oral and facial esthetics at various timelines after their surgeries.
methodsAn orofacial esthetic questionnaire (OEQ) was used in this cross-sectional study. The participants were patients who underwent LRS for the treatment of their EGD. They were divided into control (n=100) and test (n=100) groups. For the control group, LRS were performed using traditional/conventional techniques, and for the test group, LRS were performed using a modified approach. An OEQ was used to record responses. The scale comprised eight questions targeted to capture participating patients' perceptions about their own oral and facial esthetics at four timelines (baseline and one-month, six-month, and one-year follow-up). Patients responded to each question on a 10-point Likert scale (0: very dissatisfied, 10: very satisfied). Data was analyzed by independent samples T-tests using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 21.0 software (IBM SPSS Statistics, Armonk, NY).
resultsSeven (3.5%) out of the total (N=200) patients were unable to take part in the study's OEQ. At one-year follow-up, the mean and standard deviation (SD) for the test group's gingival display (GD) were 2.48±0.86 mm and 3.77±1.76 mm, respectively, and comparisons revealed that the test group's GD was significantly lower (p=0.000) than the control group. Results from the participant responses to OEQ using the Likert scale at one-year follow-up revealed significant differences between the control and test groups for all questions, except question 5 (p=0.06), as the shape of the teeth will not be affected by LRS. Patients in the test group who underwent LRS with a modified approach have a high level of satisfaction (satisfaction score: >9). Patients in the control group scored their satisfaction less favorably, with certain questions (question 3) receiving scores as low as 0.31. Perception of oral and facial esthetics was significantly higher for the test group at different time points. At one-year follow-up, the mean difference was 4.46, which was the greatest (p=0.000).
conclusionsEGD improved significantly at one year with the modified lip repositioning technique. The satisfaction level of patients with outcomes of the modified lip repositioning was significantly higher as compared to the satisfaction level of patients who underwent the conventional technique.
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.