ArticleCureus2025
Evaluation of the Condyle-Fossa Relationship in Angle's Class II Division 1 Malocclusions Using Cone-Beam Computed Tomography: A Descriptive Cross-Sectional Study in Humans.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Background The condyle-fossa relationship is essential for smooth, pain-free jaw movement, relying on symmetrical and balanced condyles. However, this relationship may vary in individuals with malocclusions. Despite its clinical significance, few studies have examined the three-dimensional aspects of condyle morphology and position in class II division 1 malocclusion, and there is a lack of comprehensive data on its subdivision. Aim and objective This study aimed to assess and compare the condyle-fossa relationship, condyle positions, and the dimensional and positional symmetry between the right and left condyles in class II division 1 malocclusion and its subdivisions. Methodology Eighty patients aged 18 years and older were categorized into two groups: the control group (class II division 1) and the test group (class II division 1, subdivision), with 40 individuals in each group. Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) images were used for the evaluation, employing Will Master software (HDX WILL Corporation, Korea). Digital measurements, including condyle-fossa depth, joint spaces, and positional parameters, were taken using OnDemand 3D software (version 2016.12, Cybermed, Korea). Statistical analysis included descriptive statistics, t-tests, and one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), with Tukey's post hoc tests for multiple pairwise comparisons. Results No significant differences were found between the right and left sides across all parameters in the control group. In contrast, the test group showed significant differences in condylar fossa depth (P=0.001) and superior joint space (P=0.006). The class I side exhibited a higher mean condylar fossa depth than the class II side, while the class II side displayed a higher mean superior joint space. Comparisons between the control and test groups revealed significant differences in mean condylar fossa depth (P=0.001), anterior joint space (P=0.014), and mediolateral diameter of the condylar process (P=0.009). Conclusions Significant differences were observed in condylar fossa depth and superior joint space between the class II division 1 subdivision group and the class II division 1 group. Additionally, asymmetry in condylar positions was noted, with the class I side showing a deeper condylar fossa and the class II side displaying a larger superior joint space.
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.