ArticleCureus2025
Skeletal Stability Following LeFort I Maxillary Advancement With Rigid Fixation: A Retrospective 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Postoperative skeletal relapse is the most common complication following LeFort I maxillary advancement, even with modern rigid fixation techniques. This retrospective study aimed to evaluate the magnitude and predictors of horizontal skeletal relapse at one year after Le Fort 1 advancement osteotomy stabilized exclusively with rigid fixation. Materials and methods Thirty-two consecutive adult patients (mean age, 25 years) who underwent LeFort I advancement (with or without simultaneous mandibular surgery) between 2018 and 2021 were included after obtaining approval from the institutional ethics committee. All procedures followed a standardized protocol using four L- or straight miniplates at the pyriform and zygomatic buttress regions bilaterally, without routine bone grafting for gaps of ≤6 mm. Digital lateral cephalograms were obtained preoperatively (T0), immediately postoperatively (T1), and ≥12 months postoperatively (T2). The horizontal position of point A parallel to the Frankfort plane was measured using Dolphin Imaging software. Statistical analyses included independent t-tests and multivariate linear regression. Results The mean maxillary advancement at T1 was 5.52±1.18 mm. At a mean follow-up of 14.38±1.29 months, mean horizontal relapse was 1.33±0.31 mm, representing 24.06±2.92% of the surgical advancement. Patients with advancements >5 mm (n=19) showed significantly lower percentage relapse (22.07±2.64% vs. 26.06±3.35%, p=0.003) and less overjet relapse (0.27±0.12 mm vs. 0.41±0.10 mm, p=0.001) than those with ≤5 mm advancement. Multivariate linear regression confirmed that greater magnitude of advancement was an independent negative predictor of percentage relapse (p=0.033). Concomitant mandibular surgery, age, and sex did not significantly affect the stability. Conclusion Four-point 2.0-mm titanium miniplate fixation provided reliable long-term skeletal stability after LeFort I maxillary advancement. Larger advancements were more stable than smaller ones, supporting adequate rather than conservative surgical correction. Clinicians can counsel patients that approximately one-quarter of the achieved advancement is typically lost within the first postoperative year with excellent stability thereafter.
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.