ArticleSurgical and radiologic anatomy : SRA2024
Radiological examination of greater palatine canal medial wall dehiscence.
Article in Surgical and radiologic anatomy : SRA, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe greater palatine canal (GPC) connects the pterygopalatine fossa to the greater palatine foramen and houses vital neurovascular structures, which provide sensory innervation and circulation to the gums, palate, and nasal cavity. The GPC is of great clinical importance to various medical specialties; however, the anatomical variability of the GPC poses a risk of iatrogenic injury and complications. Therefore, understanding the normal anatomy and variations of the GPC is crucial for identifying vital structures and minimizing risks in clinical practice. PURPOSE: The aim was to fill a gap in the current literature by focusing on the prevalence of GPC medial wall dehiscence, a lesser-known anatomic variation, in radiological scans.
methodsA total of 200 head and neck CT scans were examined, where 71 scans met the inclusion criteria. Statistical significance for incidence of GPC medial wall dehiscence, in reference to sex and side, was measured.
resultsThe GPC medial wall dehiscence was observed in 69% of scans. Bilateral dehiscence was seen in 57.7% of scans, while right-sided and left-sided unilateral dehiscence were found in 14.1% and 11.3%, respectively. Significant difference was found between the incidence of bilateral dehiscence compared to the absence of dehiscence.
conclusionPrevious studies have highlighted the potential risks associated with invasive procedures involving the GPC. The clinical relevance of GPC medial wall dehiscence lies in the increased risk of transecting the contained neurovascular bundle. The presence of dehiscence emphasizes the need for meticulous preoperative radiologic analysis to tailor surgical approaches to individual patient anatomy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39316148What 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.