ArticleCureus2025
Association Between Facial Biotype and Condylar Spaces in Orthodontic Patients: A Cross-Sectional Cone-Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) Study.
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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCondylar position is a key element in diagnosis and treatment planning in orthodontics and rehabilitation. Facial biotype influences features such as muscular strength and vertical dimension. Evidence associated with a possible relationship between them is still limited, which keeps the topic clinically and scientifically relevant.
objectiveThis was an observational, analytical, cross-sectional study conducted using CBCT records of adult patients treated at the Orthodontics and Maxillofacial Orthopedics Graduate Clinic of Universidad Cuauhtémoc, San Luis Potosí, Mexico. It aimed to evaluate the association between facial biotype and condylar position in orthodontic patients using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and to identify condylar space distribution patterns, bilateral symmetry, and factors associated with ideal condylar position and specific pattern membership. Materials and methods: CBCT scans of 100 adult orthodontic patients were analyzed in this study. The anterior (AS), superior (SS), and posterior (PS) condylar spaces were measured on both sides. Facial biotypes were determined using Ricketts cephalometric analysis. Descriptive statistics, analysis of variance (ANOVA), cluster analysis, bilateral symmetry assessment, and multivariate regression models were used in the study. Results: Dolichofacial patients exhibited a significantly smaller right AS than those with the brachyfacial and mesofacial types (p = 0.011). Cluster analysis revealed three condylar space patterns: Group 1 (close to ideal), Group 2 (moderately enlarged), and Group 3 (enlarged) patterns. Bilateral concordance was observed in 37 (37%) patients in G1, 20 (20%) in G2, and five (5%) in G3. Dolichofacial biotype significantly increased the likelihood of bilateral G1 membership (odds ratio (OR) = 4.08, p = 0.041). None of these factors consistently predicted strict compliance with Ikeda's ideal values. Conclusions: Facial biotypes selectively influence condylar position, with dolichofacial patients showing reduced AS. The condylar position exhibits distinct subgroup patterns, and bilateral symmetry is not always present. The dolichofacial biotype was the main predictor of condylar configuration. These findings emphasize the need for individualized joint evaluation, interpretation of the biotype as a modulator of the condylar-fossa relationship, and reliance on distribution patterns rather than rigid values for orthodontic diagnosis and treatment planning.
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.