ArticleScientific reports2025
Exploring the relationship between condylar position and pharyngeal airway dimensions using 3D analysis across different skeletal patterns.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study explored the relationship between condylar position and oropharyngeal airway dimensions across various sagittal and vertical skeletal patterns. Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans from 330 individuals aged 12 to 18 were analyzed. The individuals were categorized into sagittal skeletal Classes I, II, and III and divided into groups based on vertical skeletal patterns. Each vertical group was further subdivided according to condylar position as anterior, centric, or posterior. Airway dimensions-specifically oropharyngeal volume (OPV), area (OPA), and minimum cross-sectional area (MCA)-along with condylar position, were measured. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used for intergroup comparisons, followed by Pairwise Comparisons with Bonferroni adjustment. Spearman correlation was used to assess the relationship between airway parameters, age, craniofacial measurements, and condylar concentricity (CC). Multiple linear regression (MLR) analysis was applied to identify predictors of oropharyngeal airway dimensions based on age, anteroposterior and vertical skeletal patterns (ANB, FMA), and condylar concentricity. The comparison of airway dimensions within each sagittal class revealed that individuals with anterior condylar position and hyperdivergent patterns had the narrowest airway dimensions (OPV, OPA, and MCA) in Class II and III. However, when differences were evaluated between sagittal skeletal classes within each vertical pattern, Class II subjects with anterior condylar position exhibited the smallest airway dimensions. These findings emphasize the significant influence of skeletal pattern and condylar position on oropharyngeal airway dimensions. Class II individuals with anterior condylar position consistently had the smallest airway dimensions. In contrast, Class III individuals with posterior condylar position had the largest, highlighting the combined role of sagittal and vertical craniofacial patterns and condylar positioning in shaping airway morphology.
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.