ArticleOral and maxillofacial surgery2025
Fractal analysis of the mandibular ramus in class II and III patients undergoing orthognathic surgery: retrospective study trough cone-beam computed tomography.
Article in Oral and maxillofacial 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.
- Evaluation of TMJ bone microarchitecture in malocclusion and tooth loss using fractal dimension analysis.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Evaluating fractal value of mandibular ramus and condylar volume in patients undergoing orthognathic surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Maxillofacial plastic and reconstructive surgery · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionOne of the challenges of orthognathic surgery (OS) is maintaining condylar position during osteosynthesis. It is believed that the post-surgical condylar position is related to postoperative morphological changes in the temporomandibular joint (TMJ), as well as surgical stability.
objectiveThe aim of this study is to perform fractal analysis of the mandibular ramus in class II and class III patients undergoing OS, analyzing cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) images one month before surgery (T0), one month after surgery (T1), and six to eight months after surgery (T2). MATERIALS AND
methodsFractal analysis was performed on coronal and sagittal reconstructions. Regions of interest (ROIs) were selected for each patient and evaluated region. The ROIs underwent a processing method described by White & Rudolph in 1999. After processing, fractal analysis calculation was performed using the box-counting method by the "Fractal Box Count" function of the ImageJ software.
resultsWhen examining the different periods (T0, T1, and T2) among class II and class III patients, no statistically significant differences were identified (p > 0.05). This finding suggests stability in the fractal characteristics of the analyzed region, regardless of skeletal class.
conclusionOS for correction of Class II and Class III malocclusions did not demonstrate a significant impact on the microstructure of the mandibular ramus over time.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40673961What 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.