SynthesisProgress in orthodontics2024
Relationship between craniofacial skeletal patterns and anatomic characteristics of masticatory muscles: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Progress in orthodontics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to trial NCT06870084 (The Relationship Between Masseter Muscle Thickness and Different Craniofacial Skeletal Patterns), which is not on this map. Cited by 9 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.
The Relationship Between Masseter Muscle Thickness and Different Craniofacial Skeletal Patterns
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Craniofacial morphology and its association with masseter and medial pterygoid muscle thickness among adults from a population-based sample.Clinical oral investigations · 2026Article
- Dentofacial effects of lingual versus labial fixed appliances in adults treated with four-premolar extractions and skeletal anchorage-supported mechanics : A retrospective comparative cephalometric study.Journal of orofacial orthopedics = Fortschritte der Kieferorthopadie : Organ/official journal Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Kieferorthopadie · 2026Article
- Three-dimensional evaluation of lip changes before and after bracket debonding in patients with different vertical skeletal patterns.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Correlation of Facial Form with Temporomandibular Joint-Space Dimensions: A CBCT-Based Cross-Sectional Study.Dentistry journal · 2026Article
- Occlusal force analysis with T-Scan and Innobyte in adult patients: a prospective study.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Observational
- Correction to: Relationship between craniofacial skeletal patterns and anatomic characteristics of masticatory muscles: a systematic review and meta‑analysis.Progress in orthodontics · 2025Article
- Anterior Tooth Inclination Between Skeletal Class II and III Malocclusions After Surgical Orthodontic Treatment.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- The Three-Dimensional Investigation of the Radiographic Boundary of Mandibular Full-Arch Distalization in Different Facial Patterns.Journal of personalized medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe anatomic characteristics of the masticatory muscles differ across craniofacial skeletal patterns.
objectiveTo identify differences in the anatomic characteristics of masticatory muscles across different sagittal and vertical craniofacial skeletal patterns. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Studies measuring the thickness, width, cross-sectional area (CSA), volume and orientation of masticatory muscles in healthy patients of different sagittal (Class I, Class II, and Class III) and/or vertical (normodivergent, hypodivergent, and hyperdivergent) patterns. INFORMATION SOURCES: Unrestricted literature searches in 8 electronic databases/registers until December 2023. RISK OF BIAS AND SYNTHESIS OF
resultsStudy selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment with a customised tool were performed independently in duplicate. Random-effects meta-analysis and assessment of the certainty of clinical recommendations with the GRADE approach were conducted.
results34 studies (37 publications) were selected with a total of 2047 participants and data from 16 studies were pulled in the meta-analysis. Masseter muscle thickness in relaxation was significantly greater by 1.14 mm (95% CI 0.74-1.53 mm) in hypodivergent compared to normodivergent patients while it was significantly decreased in hyperdivergent patients by - 1.14 mm (95% CI - 1.56 to - 0.73 mm) and - 2.28 mm (95% CI - 2.71 to - 1.85 mm) compared to normodivergent and hypodivergent patients respectively. Similar significant differences were seen between these groups in masseter muscle thickness during contraction as well as masseter muscle CSA and volume. Meta-analyses could not be performed for sagittal categorizations due to insufficient number of studies.
conclusionsConsiderable differences in masseter muscle thickness, CSA and volume were found across vertical skeletal configurations being significantly reduced in hyperdivergent patients; however, results should be interpreted with caution due to the high risk of bias of the included studies. These variations in the anatomic characteristics of masticatory muscles among different craniofacial patterns could be part of the orthodontic diagnosis and treatment planning process. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42022371187 .
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.