Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39114798›Full record

ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2024

Geometric Morphometric Study on Distinguishing Metopic Craniosynostosis from Metopic Ridging.

Yoshiaki Sakamoto, Hideki Amano, Naomichi Ogihara, Tomoru Miwa, Ikkei Tamada, Makoto Hikosaka, Keisuke Imai

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Non-syndromic craniosynostosis.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2025
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Yoshiaki SakamotoFrom the Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Keio University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Hideki AmanoLaboratory of Human Evolutionary Biomechanics, Department of Biological Sciences, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Naomichi OgiharaLaboratory of Human Evolutionary Biomechanics, Department of Biological Sciences, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Tomoru MiwaDepartment of Neurosurgery, Keio University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Ikkei TamadaDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Tokyo Metropolitan Children's Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
Makoto HikosakaDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, National Center for Child Health and Development, Tokyo, Japan.
Keisuke ImaiDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Osaka City General Hospital, Osaka, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Craniosynostosis, a common congenital anomaly, results from premature fusion of the cranial sutures. One of the forms of craniosynostosis is premature fusion of the metopic suture, referred to as trigonocephaly, but the diagnosis of metopic suture synostosis remains controversial. The purpose of this study was to clarify, using geometric morphometric analysis, if a metopic ridge alone observed in cases of mild trigonocephaly represents a pathological phenomenon. Methods: Three different cranial morphologies were compared among patients up to 2 years old who were categorized into the true group, the mild group, and the normal group, based on the presence or absence of specific symptoms, history of cranioplasty for trigonocephaly, or lack of any abnormality on computed tomography. Using the obtained computed tomography images, 235 anatomical landmarks and semi-landmarks were plotted on the entire cranial surface for analysis of neurocranial morphology, and the cranial shapes represented by landmarks were analyzed using geometric morphometrics. Principal components of shape variations among specimens were then computed, based on the variance-covariance matrix of the Procrustes residuals of all specimens, and statistically analyzed. Results: The principal component analyses of the variations in endocranial shape, frontal bone shape, and occipital bone shape did not show any significant differences in cranial morphology between mild trigonocephaly and normal skulls; however, true trigonocephaly was found to differ significantly from mild trigonocephaly and normal skulls. Conclusions: These findings suggest that in assessments of cranial morphology, the presence of a ridge alone cannot be diagnosed as fundamentally pathological, and may represent normal morphology.

Identifiers

PMID39114798
PMCPMC11305778

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.