ArticleCureus2024
A New Approach for the Assessment of True Maxillomandibular Sagittal Relationship: A Zeta Angle.
Article in Cureus, 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.
- Assessing sagittal discrepancies using beta angle, ANB angle and WITS appraisal: A cephalometric study.Bioinformation · 2025Article
- Comparison of Yen, Beta, Wits, K angles with ANB in assessing sagittal dysplasia: A cephalometric study.Bioinformation · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe assessment of sagittal skeletal dysplasia is crucial for accurate diagnosis and treatment planning, thus necessitating a thorough evaluation. A novel cephalometric parameter, known as the Zeta angle, was proposed in this study for the evaluation of the maxillomandibular relationship in the sagittal plane. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis observational study was carried out using 291 pre-treatment lateral cephalograms of participants aged between 15 and 25 years, categorized into skeletal class I, II, and III relationships based on Wits appraisal, ANB angle, and Beta angle. The individuals reported to the Department of Orthodontics from January 2021 to October 2023, Manav Rachna Dental College, Manav Rachna International Institute of Research and Studies, Faridabad. The Zeta angle was constructed using three skeletal reference points as point Pt (pterygoid), point M (center of premaxilla), and point Pm (suprapogonion) and was measured perpendicular to point M on the Pt-Pm line and the M-Pm line to determine the severity and type of maxillomandibular discrepancy in the sagittal plane. Statistical tests were used to obtain the mean values for the Zeta angle. Analysis of variance (ANOVA), followed by the Bonferroni post-hoc test, was used to assess skeletal differences between the groups. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were used to evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of this angle.
resultsThe results indicated that a Zeta angle between 57° and 64° had a class I skeletal jaw pattern, a Zeta angle less than 57° indicated a class II skeletal jaw pattern, and a Zeta angle greater than 64° indicated a class III skeletal jaw pattern. ROC curves showed that a Zeta angle less than 57.5° had 80% sensitivity and 82.5% specificity in distinguishing class II from the class I subset. A Zeta angle greater than 64.5° has a sensitivity and specificity of 92.5% in distinguishing class III from the class I subset.
conclusionThe Zeta angle may serve as an additional diagnostic tool for the reliable determination of sagittal jaw relationships due to its establishment based on stable anatomical points, thus remaining unaffected by jaw rotations and orthodontic treatments.
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.