ArticleBioengineering (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Single versus Double Plate Fixation in Condylar Neck Fractures: Clinical Results and Biomechanics Simulation.
Article in Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland), 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.
- Three-dimensional finite element analysis for internal fixation of mandibular condylar fractures: a scoping review.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2026Article
- Effectiveness of Finite Element Modelling in Maxillofacial Surgery: A Review of Evidence from Saudi Arabia.Cureus · 2025Review
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.
Funding
Abstract
The open reduction of mandibular condyle neck fractures is difficult due to the limited surgical field and complex facial nerve structures. The most effective fixation method for narrow fractured segments is debated as standard double four-hole plate fixation is often not feasible. This research compared bone stability and force resistance between single-long-plate and double-short-plate fixations using clinical outcomes, a Sawbones mandible model, and finite element analysis. In patients with condyle neck fractures, nine were fixed with single-long-plate and twelve with double-short-plate fixations, with no significant differences in malocclusion and facial palsy rates. In compression tests with a Sawbones model, displacements in the posterior part were similar in both fixation groups. In contrast, the anterior part had significantly higher displacements in the single-long-plate group. Finite element analysis showed higher displacements in both anterior and posterior parts in the single-plate group compared to the double-short-plate group. Maximum stresses were at the second screw hole in single-long-plate fixation and the turning point of the upper plate at the condyle neck in double-short-plate fixation. Double-short-plate fixations demonstrated better stability and force resistance than single-long-plate fixations.
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.