ArticleAesthetic plastic surgery2025
Precision and Efficacy of Digital Technology in Orthognathic Surgery for Facial Asymmetry Correction: A Quantitative Analysis.
Article in Aesthetic plastic surgery, 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.
- Fully Digital vs. Conventional Planning in Bimaxillary Orthognathic Surgery: Effects on 3D Accuracy and Surgical Efficiency.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Facial Contouring in Orthognathic Surgery: The Role of Facial Implants.Craniomaxillofacial trauma & reconstruction · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate the efficacy of digital technology-assisted design in orthognathic surgery for patients with facial asymmetry. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe study comprised 30 patients with facial asymmetry. Mimics software was used to digitally simulate surgical plans and create guide plates for orthognathic surgery. The midsagittal plane, Frankfurt horizontal plane, and coronal plane of the perosseous nasion point served as reference planes to evaluate three-dimensional consistency between preoperative simulation designs and postoperative three-dimensional cranial models, specifically examining bilateral maxillary and mandibular canine cusps and mesiobuccal cusps of first molars. Distance differences between bilateral corresponding landmarks on postoperative models and the three reference planes were measured, asymmetry rates calculated, and the distance from pogonion to midsagittal plane measured to evaluate facial hard tissue symmetry after surgery.
resultsNo significant differences were observed between preoperative simulation designs and postoperative three-dimensional cranial models regarding the distances between bilateral corresponding landmarks and the three reference planes. Postoperatively, distance differences between bilateral corresponding landmarks and the three reference planes were ≤ 1 mm. Seventy-five percent of asymmetry rate indicators were less than 10%. The mean distance from pogonion to midsagittal plane was 1.82 ± 1.16 mm.
conclusionThe application of digital technology in orthognathic surgery for patients with facial asymmetry enhances operative precision and ensures favorable treatment outcomes. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Digital technology in orthognathic surgical planning improves treatment effectiveness for patients with facial asymmetry. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .
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.