ArticleJPRAS open2026
Patient-specific implants are more stable than conventional miniplates in Le Fort I osteotomy in patients with clefts.
Article in JPRAS open, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Virtual surgical planning (VSP) and patient-specific implants (PSI) have become standard in orthognathic surgery, demonstrating accuracy and stability comparable with miniplates. Aims: To compare postoperative skeletal stability of Le Fort I osteotomy using VSP with PSIs versus conventional cast model surgery with miniplate fixation in patients with clefts. Methods: Retrospective analysis of lateral cephalograms and medical records of patients who underwent Le Fort I osteotomy between 2017 and 2023 at the Cleft Palate and Craniofacial Center, Helsinki University Hospital. Horizontal and vertical surgical advancement and relapse were assessed by superimposing preoperative, immediate, and one-year postoperative cephalometric tracings. Statistical analyses included independent samples Results: Fifty-nine non-growing patients with cleft lip and/or palate (29 males; median age 18.9 years) were categorized into two groups based on the fixation method (19 PSI, 40 miniplate). Mean maxillary advancement was greater with PSIs than miniplates (7.1 mm vs. 4.3 mm; p < 0.001). Mean vertical movement was -0.8 mm with PSIs vs. -3.8 mm with miniplates (p < 0.001), reflecting more impactions in the PSI group. Horizontal and vertical relapses were significantly smaller in the PSI group (horizontal: 0.28 mm vs. 0.9 mm, 4% vs. 21% of advancement; p < 0.001; vertical: 0.81 mm vs. 1.6 mm, 30% vs. 41% of movement; p = 0.004). Horizontal advancement correlated with relapse only with miniplates (r = 0.329, p = 0.038). Conclusions: PSI fixation in cleft Le Fort I osteotomy seems to provide greater horizontal and vertical stability than miniplates.
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.