Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41573773›Full record

ReviewCraniomaxillofacial trauma & reconstruction2026

Facial Contouring in Orthognathic Surgery: The Role of Facial Implants.

Gabriel Conceição Brito, Márcio de Moraes, Leonardo Faverani, Sergio Olate

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Craniomaxillofacial trauma & reconstruction, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Gabriel Conceição BritoDivision of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Department of Oral Diagnosis, Piracicaba School of Dentistry, State University of Campinas, São Paulo 13414-903, Brazil; gabriel.bucomaxilo@gmail.com (G.C.B.); mmoraes@unicamp.br (M.d.M.); faverani@unicamp.br (L.F.).
Márcio de MoraesDivision of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Department of Oral Diagnosis, Piracicaba School of Dentistry, State University of Campinas, São Paulo 13414-903, Brazil; gabriel.bucomaxilo@gmail.com (G.C.B.); mmoraes@unicamp.br (M.d.M.); faverani@unicamp.br (L.F.).
Leonardo FaveraniDivision of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Department of Oral Diagnosis, Piracicaba School of Dentistry, State University of Campinas, São Paulo 13414-903, Brazil; gabriel.bucomaxilo@gmail.com (G.C.B.); mmoraes@unicamp.br (M.d.M.); faverani@unicamp.br (L.F.).ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2249-3048
Sergio OlateDivision of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Department of Oral Diagnosis, Piracicaba School of Dentistry, State University of Campinas, São Paulo 13414-903, Brazil; gabriel.bucomaxilo@gmail.com (G.C.B.); mmoraes@unicamp.br (M.d.M.); faverani@unicamp.br (L.F.).ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8153-0676

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Orthognathic surgery restores functional balance and facial esthetics in patients with dentofacial deformities. The use of adjunctive facial implants-made from materials such as porous polyethylene, titanium, or polyetheretherketone (PEEK)-has increased to enhance contour and projection, although standardized guidelines for their selection and integration remain scarce. Following PRISMA-ScR guidelines, a systematic search of PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and LILACS identified studies reporting facial implants placed concomitantly with orthognathic surgery. Eligible studies included case reports, case series, observational studies, clinical trials, and reviews involving human patients, without language or date restrictions. Seventeen studies published between 1998 and 2025 met the inclusion criteria, comprising retrospective and prospective designs, case series, and one technical note. Implants were used in the malar, infraorbital, paranasal, chin, mandibular body, and angle regions. Materials included PEEK, porous polyethylene, silicone, hydroxyapatite, polymethylmethacrylate, and titanium. PEEK was mainly used for patient-specific implants, while porous polyethylene was commonly used as stock implants. Follow-up time, outcome reporting, and study design varied widely, reflecting substantial methodological heterogeneity and predominantly observational evidence. As a result, outcomes were primarily reported qualitatively, limiting comparative assessment and long-term inference. Overall, the available literature suggests that alloplastic facial implants may serve as useful adjuncts to orthognathic surgery for contour enhancement, with outcomes influenced by implant design, surgical expertise, fixation, and soft tissue conditions. However, the current evidence base remains limited, underscoring the need for standardized outcome measures, comparative studies, and longer follow-up to better inform clinical decision-making and future research.

Indexed as

facial estheticfacial implantsorthognathic surgery

Identifiers

PMID41573773
PMCPMC12821587

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.