ArticleCureus2024
Assessing the Adequacy of Orbital Reconstruction With Titanium Mesh Using Clinical and Radiological Measures.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Surgical Performance of 3D-Printed Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) Patient-Specific Implants and Titanium Mesh in Clinically Matched Orbital Reconstruction: A Cadaveric Study.Craniomaxillofacial trauma & reconstruction · 2026Article
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
Background Orbital reconstruction aims to restore the original orbit volume and correct diplopia, enophthalmos, and ocular motility of the fractured orbit. This study aimed to assess the adequacy of orbital reconstruction using radiological and clinical factors. Methods In this retrospective study, patients with orbital blowout fractures meeting clinical or radiographic criteria underwent orbital reconstruction with titanium mesh. The orbital volume and anteroposterior displacement were calculated pre- and post-operatively using computed tomography. Diplopia, inferior orbital nerve examination, and ocular movement were also evaluated. Pre- and post-operative orbital volumes of the fractured and contralateral unfractured orbits were compared. Statistical analysis was performed using MS Excel (Redmond, USA) and STATA BE (Texas, US). Results There was a significant reduction in the difference in volumes between fractured and normal orbits postoperatively (p-value <0.001). The mean difference between the reconstructed orbital floor fracture and the contralateral normal orbit was 0.55 cm
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.