ReviewSurgical and radiologic anatomy : SRA2026
Distinguishing true from pseudo-absent styloid process: a case-prompted critical analysis.
Review in Surgical and radiologic anatomy : SRA, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Compression Syndromes of the Stylohyoid Complex: Neural, Arterial, and Venous Phenotypes in a Dynamic Neurovascular Corridor.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The styloid process (SP) of the temporal bone is well-documented for its morphological variability, yet the distinction between true absence and pseudo-absence remains poorly defined in the literature. This study critically examines published reports of SP absence and proposes clear terminological criteria to differentiate these entities. True absent SP denotes aplasia of both tympanohyal and stylohyal segments, whereas pseudo-absent SP indicates a hypomineralised tympanohyal concealed beneath the vaginal process of the tympanic plate. Analysis of the literature indicates that previous studies using CT, panoramic radiography, and dry skull analysis have frequently conflated these variants, with some authors misidentifying the inferiorly projecting vaginal process as a duplicate or short SP. This critical reappraisal was prompted by a cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) case demonstrating bilateral pseudo-absent SPs in a 39-year-old female, in which low-density tympanohyal segments (10.5 mm) were entirely masked by extensively developed vaginal processes (15.5 mm). To our knowledge, this represents the first CBCT-documented case of this morphology and only the third reported evidence, following dry-skull observations. Accurate differentiation between true and pseudo-absent SP has implications for radiological interpretation, surgical planning, and understanding stylohyoid complex development.
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.