ArticleBMC oral health2025
Three-dimensional analysis of mandibular and condylar growth using artificial intelligence tools: a comparison of twin-block and Frankel II Appliances.
Article in BMC oral health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Accuracy of 3D radiological skull measurements: reoriented sections and geometric correction versus caliper reference.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Multidimensional analysis of the impact of adenoid hypertrophy on pediatric dentofacial and airway structures and construction of a diagnostic model.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAnalyzing the morphological growth changes upon mandibular advancement between Twin Block (TB) and Functional Regulator II (FR2) in Class II patients involves measuring the condylar and mandibular changes in terms of linear and volumetric measurements, as well as the distances registered after superimposition. Correspondingly, 3D digital assessment with the benefit of artificial intelligence tools was applied, and color-coded distance maps were descriptively interpreted to visualize the direction of growth. SUBJECTS AND
methodsTwenty patients aged 9 to 12 years with skeletal Class II malocclusion with overjet (5-9 mm) were enrolled into two groups: Group 1 (TB) and Group 2 (FR2). CBCT radiographs were taken at T0 (prior to treatment) and T1 (at the end of effective treatment; 7-11 months). 3D UX-Net algorithm was used to extract the 3D models and obtain the volumes. Visual Basic software was employed to develop a method for calculating the 3D distances and angles. 3D superimposition methods through Viewbox software were utilized to analyze growth direction following the treatments, using color-coded distance map visualizations.
resultsThe average volume increase of the mandible, right and left condyle was 2666.00 ± 1469.16 mm³, 207.70 ± 125.28 mm³, and 216.90 ± 121.65 mm³, respectively, after TB treatment, and 3316.10 ± 1552.29 mm³, 208.90 ± 116.85 mm³, and 193.65 ± 114.25 mm³, respectively, after FR2 treatment. The mean absolute distances (MAD) for the mandible, right, and left condyle from T1 to T0 were in TB group 1.238 ± 0.757 mm, 2.248 ± 0.346 mm, 2.267 ± 0.593 mm, respectively, and in FR2 group 1.417 ± 0.550 mm, 2.616 ± 1.063 mm, 2.475 ± 0.916 mm, respectively. The visualization of color-coded maps revealed a superior-posterior growth direction of the condyle measuring within 3 mm after the treatment.
conclusionsAlthough mandibular and condylar volumes increased in each group when comparing T0 to T1, indicating the efficacy of both appliances in enhancing growth, no clinically or statistically significant differences were observed between the groups in terms of volumetric, linear, and 3D superimposition changes. However, color-coded distance maps demonstrated a consistent pattern of posterior-superior relocation of the condyles in most cases after treatment when comparing T1 to T0, whereas the back of the ramus in more than half of the cases has moved backwards. With no statistical differences between the studied groups.
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.