ReviewAesthetic surgery journal. Open forum2025
Implant-Based Chin Augmentation Vs Osseous Genioplasty: A Systematic Review of Indications and Outcomes.
Review in Aesthetic surgery journal. Open forum, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Autologous Tissue Grafts for Chin Augmentation With or Without Genioplasty: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Mandibular angle osteotomy in Asian patients: A narrative review on techniques, emerging technologies, and personalized surgical strategies.JPRAS open · 2026Review
- Integrated Surgical and Nonsurgical Approaches to Chin Augmentation: Our Clinical Algorithm and Technique.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2026Article
- Risk Factors and Complication Rates of Inpatient Genioplasty Procedures in the U.S. Healthcare System: A 22-Year Retrospective Multi-center Analysis.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2026Article
- The Advancement-Rotation Principle in Chin Augmentation: A Preliminary Case Series.Aesthetic surgery journal. Open forum · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Osseous genioplasty (OG) and implant-based chin augmentation are 2 primary approaches for correcting microgenia. A comprehensive synthesis comparing their outcomes, safety profiles, and patient satisfaction is lacking. In this study, the authors aim to assess the safety and outcome profile of implant-based chin augmentation and OG. A systematic review was conducted following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. A comprehensive search of PubMed, MEDLINE, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Google Scholar was performed in November 2024, utilizing keywords related to genioplasty, chin implants, and specific implant materials. Inclusion criteria required studies to provide original data on isolated procedures performed at a single institution, ensuring consistency in perioperative management. The authors included 7 single-center studies involving 1126 patients with microgenia (740 underwent OG; 386 received implants). Follow-up durations ranged from 6 months to 6 years. Implant materials included Level of Evidence 3 Therapeutic:
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.