Trial reportBMC oral health2024
Evaluation of the resection plane three-dimensional positional accuracy using a resection guide directional guidance slot; a randomized clinical trial.
Trial report in BMC oral health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Novel Alloplastic Patient-Specific Temporalis Tendon Enthesis for Mandibular Resection With Coronoidectomy: A Case Series.Journal of oral rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Patient-specific arthroplasty guide in paediatric temporomandibular joint ankylosis management. An accuracy-based case series.Maxillofacial plastic and reconstructive surgery · 2026Article
- Three-Dimensional Surgical Planning in Mandibular Cancer: A Decade of Clinical Experience and Outcomes.Cancers · 2026Article
- Enhanced accuracy of cutting planes and condylar positioning in mandibular reconstruction using three-dimensional-printed guides: An in vitro study.Journal of dental sciences · 2026Article
- A Case of Application of Computer-Aided Design and Manufacturing Technology and Extended Reality Surgical Assistance to Marginal Mandibulectomy.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimThe study was performed to compare the mandibular resection guide with a directional guidance slot with the conventional guide regarding three-dimensional positional accuracy. MATERIALS AND
methodsTwenty-six patients with lateral segmental mandibular defects were selected, and randomly allocated into two groups. All defects were managed with preoperative virtual surgical planning. Resection in the test group was conducted using a resection guide with a directional guidance slot, while a conventional resection guide design was utilized in the control group. The linear and angular deviation of the osteotomy planes was analyzed for both groups, along with the accuracy of the insertion of the reconstruction bone block in the resected defect. Data were documented, absolute deviation was calculated, statistical analysis was performed and significance was set at the 5% level.
resultsThe cases conducted with a directional guidance templet reported a statistically significant difference when compared to the conventional edge-cutting guide regarding the linear and angular spatial osteotomy plane position (P < 0.001). The defect span analysis reported excellent levels of agreement in both groups (ICC = 1.00, ICC = 0.995), however, the difference between the groups was statistically significant (P < 0.001).
conclusionThe study demonstrated the enhanced positional accuracy of the resection plane and reconstruction block placement when a directional slot is incorporated in the computer-generated resection guide.
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.