ArticleHead & face medicine2025
Enhanced precision in stone localization and intraoral removal in sialolithiasis: the role of preoperative computer tomographic scanning in surgical planning.
Article in Head & face medicine, 2025. 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe precise localization of stones within the submandibular duct is crucial for the successful intraoral removal in sialolithiasis. Customizing surgical approaches based on the stone's ductal location is imperative. Particularly challenging are stones beneath the lingual nerve, requiring a landmark-guided approach due to their non-palpable nature. This study aimed to comprehend stone positioning, location-specific characteristics, and develop suitable surgical approaches. We conducted a thorough analysis of numerous preoperative computed tomography (CT) scans for this purpose.
methodsWe performed a retrospective review of the medical records of patients who underwent intraoral stone removal between 2006 and 2022. Two different surgical approaches were applied based on the stone location as determined by preoperative CT scans. The mediolingual approach was used for superficial stones, while the laterogingival approach was reserved for deeper stones. Patient demographics, sialolithiasis features, and postoperative complications were analyzed. T-test was performed to compare stone characteristics between different locations, and a receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was used to identify the critical size threshold for predicting stone location.
resultsMedical records of 465 patients were reviewed. Out of 616 stones, 614 were successfully removed with two distinct surgical approaches guided by preoperative CT scans. Two patients reported retention, and 11 experienced postoperative tongue sensation changes. The hilum was the most common stone location, and deeper stones, approached laterolingually, were generally larger. Analysis identified a 4.25 mm width as the most sensitive and specific threshold for deep stones. Stone volume showed no statistically significant difference between smokers and non-smokers, alcohol consumers and non-consumer.
conclusionThe result of the study underscore the significance of precise stone localization and endorse the efficacy of landmark-guided surgical approaches in managing sialolithiasis.
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.