ArticleBMC oral health2026
The minimal region required for accurate CBCT-3D facial registration in evaluating soft-hard tissue changes after orthodontic extraction.
Article in BMC oral health, 2026. 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
Abstract
backgroundTo determine the minimal registration area required for accurate best-fit integration of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and three-dimensional (3D) facial images, and to apply the optimized multimodal model to quantify hard-soft tissue changes around the lips after orthodontic treatment.
methodsThis retrospective study analyzed 20 patients (6 males and 14 females; mean age 17.05 ± 7.37 years) who underwent same-day CBCT and 3D facial scanning. Four registration regions were tested: A0 (zygomatic and nasal root), and A1-A3 (progressively larger areas). Alignment accuracy was assessed using mean surface distance. The minimal effective region was then used to construct integrated models for measuring sagittal, vertical, and horizontal distances between 15 hard and 10 soft tissue landmarks before and after treatment. Differences in mean surface distance among the various registration regions were analyzed using one-way ANOVA, a paired-sample t-test was conducted to evaluate changes in sagittal, vertical, and horizontal soft and hard tissue distances before and after orthodontic extraction treatment.
resultsThe minimal region, A0 (zygomatic 2–3 cm; nasal root 1–2 cm), achieved alignment accuracy comparable to A1-A3, with no significant differences in mean surface distance (p = 0.921). Post-treatment measurements showed significant sagittal increases in lip soft tissue thickness (≈ 3–4 mm), most prominently at the philtrum and vermilion border. Philtrum retraction was approximately one-third that of the vermilion. Maxillary incisors exhibited 1–2 mm vertical intrusion and mild horizontal canine displacement, whereas most other hard-soft tissue relationships remained stable.
conclusionsThe zygomatic (2–3 cm in diameter) and nasal root (1–2 cm in diameter) regions form a minimal yet reliable registration area for accurate CBCT-3D facial image integration. After orthodontic extraction, lip soft tissue thickened sagittally despite incisor retraction, while other soft-hard relationships were largely preserved. These findings support the clinical utility of localized registration and highlight lip soft tissue adaptation as a key factor in treatment evaluation.
trial registrationThe protocol of this study (PKUSSIRB-202392145) was registered at the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (Chictr.org.cn) with the identifier ChiCTR2000034288 (01/07/2020).
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.