ReviewFrontiers in surgery2026
Morphological classification of the temporalis muscle: anatomical, radiological, and surgical perspectives.
Review in Frontiers in surgery, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The temporalis muscle (TM) shows substantive morphological variability with direct implications for surgical planning and imaging interpretation. Drawing on cadaveric series and imaging cohorts, we critically synthesise convergent findings on layered architecture, distal tendon configuration and retromolar extensions, and highlight discrepancies largely attributable to plane/sequence selection and operator dependence in magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasound. We propose a four-type classification with operational criteria based on fascicular architecture, terminal tendon pattern and accessory slips, including relationships to the deep temporal fascia and the temporomandibular joint capsule. This scheme should be regarded as a pragmatic, hypothesis-generating framework derived from heterogeneous descriptive datasets rather than a statistically validated taxonomy. Where available, we summarised reported frequencies of Types II-IV across cadaveric and imaging cohorts using a study-level evidence map. We further translate type-specific anatomy into decision support for flap harvest and lengthening temporalis myoplasty, osteotomy/coronoidectomy planning, targeted management of temporomandibular disorders (e.g., botulinum toxin, dry needling), and radiotherapy contouring. Recognising temporalis variability can improve diagnostic accuracy, optimise operative strategy and reduce complications, while underscoring the need for harmonised definitions and prospective validation.
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.