Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40271469›Full record

ArticleCraniomaxillofacial trauma & reconstruction2025

A Shift in Conceptual Thinking of Panfacial Fracture Sequencing: The Major Fragment Theory.

Patrick Wong, Antonio Atte, David Powers, Paul Tiwana

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Craniomaxillofacial trauma & reconstruction, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Patrick WongDivision of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Department of Surgery, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX 75390, USA; patrick.wong@utsouthwestern.edu.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0007-0094-8642
Antonio AtteDepartment of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, Health Sciences Center, The University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, OK 73104, USA; antonio-atte@ouhsc.edu.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0007-0071-1960
David PowersDivision of Plastic, Maxillofacial and Oral Surgery, Duke University Hospital, Durham, NC 27710, USA; david.powers@duke.edu.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2423-8980
Paul TiwanaDepartment of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, Health Sciences Center, The University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, OK 73104, USA; antonio-atte@ouhsc.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

STUDY

designA literature review of relevant publications regarding panfacial fracture sequencing.

objectiveTo review the current landscape of sequencing of panfacial trauma and propose the utilization of the Major Fragment Theory when conventional sequencing techniques are inadequate.

methodsWe conducted a review of existing literature on panfacial fracture management, focusing on sequencing techniques. Additionally, we analyzed unique fracture patterns to identify instances where conventional sequencing may be insufficient.

resultsExisting literature emphasizes directional-based sequencing techniques for panfacial fracture reduction. However, unique fracture patterns often necessitate deviation from these sequences. The Major Fragment Theory suggests prioritizing the reduction of larger fragments over conventional sequencing, particularly when dealing with complex fractures.

conclusionsWhile directional-based sequencing techniques provide a valuable framework for panfacial fracture management and almost any approach can be utilized successfully, the Major Fragment Theory offers a complementary approach for cases where conventional sequencing falls short. Incorporating this theory into practice may enhance outcomes in the treatment of panfacial fractures.

Indexed as

maxillofacial traumapanfacial fracturestrauma

Identifiers

PMID40271469
PMCPMC11977491

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.