ArticleJournal of anatomy2024
Cyclic loading failed to promote growth in a pig model of midfacial hypoplasia.
Article in Journal of anatomy, 2024. 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Regional variability in craniofacial stiffness: a study in normal and Crouzon mice during postnatal development.Biomechanics and modeling in mechanobiology · 2025Article
- Cyclic loading failed to promote growth in a pig model of midfacial hypoplasia.Journal of anatomy · 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
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Yucatan miniature pigs, often used as large animal models in clinical research, are distinguished by a breed-specific midfacial hypoplasia with anterior crossbite. Although this deformity can be corrected by distraction osteogenesis, a less invasive method is desirable. We chose a mechanical cyclic stimulation protocol that has been successful in enhancing sutural growth in small animals and in a pilot study on standard pigs. Yucatan minipigs (n = 14) were obtained in pairs, with one of each pair randomly assigned to sham or loaded groups. All animals had loading implants installed on the right nasal and frontal bones and received labels for cell proliferation and mineral apposition. After a week of healing and under anesthesia, experimental animals received cyclic tensile loads (2.5 Hz, 30 min) delivered to the right nasofrontal suture daily for 5 days. Sutural strains were recorded at the final session for experimental animals. Sham animals received the same treatment except without loading or strain gauge placement. In contrast to pilot results on standard pigs, the treatment did not produce the expected sutural widening and increased growth. Although sutures were not fused and strains were in the normal range, the targeted right nasofrontal suture was narrowed rather than widened, with no statistically significant changes in sutural cell proliferation, mineral apposition, or vascularity. In general, Yucatan minipig sutures were more vascular than those of standard pigs and also tended to have more proliferating cells. In conclusion, either because the sutures themselves are abnormal or because of growth restrictions elsewhere in the skull, this cyclic loading protocol was unable to produce the desired response of sutural widening and growth. This treatment, effective in normal animals, did not improve naturally occurring midfacial hypoplasia in Yucatan minipigs.
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.