Before orthognathic surgery, a thorough diagnosis of the maxillofacial structure is performed for combined orthodontic–surgical treatment planning. One of the tools that are used for this collaboration is the cephalometric radiograph. Cephalometric analysis is a method for measuring the location of specific anatomical landmarks upon a cephalogram. Some of these parameters are more difficult to define accurately in cases of dentofacial deformities. Therefore, the data obtained from different examiners are characterized by high variability. The present study aimed to examine whether there is a significant variation in the physicians’ measurements between orthognathic Class I (normal) cases and the cases of skeletal deformity Class III. The study involved ten physicians with a mean age of 27. All physicians underwent appropriate instruction for reading and analyzing cephalometric radiographs, and all physicians were instructed about their role in the study. Each participant received 100 cephalometric radiographs, consisting of 50 radiographs of patients with a regular facial structure (Class-I = orthognathic) and 50 photographs of patients with a specific skeletal deformity (Class-III = prognathic). According to the Frankfort Horizontal plane, each physician marked the upper incisor (U1) longitudinal axis on the radiograph and the lower incisor (L1) longitudinal axis according to the mandibular plane. Then, we measured the angle degree with the Cephninja^® application. Afterward, we performed a statistical analysis of the t-test with Bonferroni correction to check whether there is a significantly large standard deviation between the indices in the orthognathic cases compared to the prognathic cases. In the group of physicians who participated in this sample of these cephalometric radiographs, we found that in prognathic patients, the upper incisor angle measurements showed significantly more t variance relative to those physicians’ corresponding measurements radiographs of orthognathic patients. Variability increases as skeletal deformity become more severe (p = 0.026) in U1 TO FH and (p = 0.014) L1 TO MP. Cephalometric measurements, which are essential for the correct diagnosis and planning of combined orthodontic treatment, suffer from a significant examiner-based bias that is greater as deformity becomes more severe. This conclusion has implications for the accuracy of the model on which the entire plan process of the combined treatment of facial and jaw deformities is based. The surgeon should use CBCT (cone-beam computed tomography) for its three-dimensional superiority over cephalometric imaging, which will result in a more accurate evaluation of surgery planning and performance.

Background: Congenital nasal pyriform aperture stenosis (CNPAS) is a rare disorder characterized by a narrowed pyriform aperture and nasal obstruction. Children with CNPAS often exhibit a bony ridge on the underside of the secondary palate, a solitary central incisor, and a triangular-shaped palate. Due to its rarity, limited research exists, and there is no established treatment algorithm, which complicates management, particularly in craniofacial treatments and long-term follow-up. Aims: This study aimed to develop a comprehensive treatment algorithm based on long-term follow-up, focusing on maxillofacial deformities, dental considerations, and upper airway assessment. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study of four CNPAS patients treated at our institute. We performed a literature review, and a comparison was executed with our data in order to introduce our novel, age-specific clinical treatment framework. Results: A literature review was conducted, and different clinical parameters were examined. Previously published data were compared to our patients-related findings to develop our clinical treatment algorithm based on patients’ age. Patients were monitored for respiratory distress during the first two years of life. Children with cyclic cyanosis underwent surgical widening of the pyriform aperture through bony excess removal and nasal tubing to ensure airway patency. For those with ongoing desaturation events, neonatal palatal expansion was performed. At ages 10–12, additional evaluations using polysomnography and orthodontic assessments were conducted. Based on these findings, patients received surgically assisted rapid palatal expansion (SARPE) and further surgical widening of the pyriform aperture if obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) was present. Subsequent treatments included orthodontic care and restoration of the missing central incisor. Conclusions: We propose an age-based clinical treatment algorithm for CNPAS tailored to address individual patient needs throughout their growth.

Background: Pediatric odontogenic infections pose significant diagnostic challenges, particularly in distinguishing between cellulitis and abscess. Accurate differentiation is crucial for guiding appropriate management—antibiotics alone for cellulitis versus surgical incision and drainage (I&D) for an abscess—but can be difficult without specialized expertise or advanced imaging. Objective: We aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of handheld point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS; Philips Lumify), utilized by non-specialist clinicians, in differentiating cellulitis from abscess in pediatric odontogenic infections. A secondary objective was to assess its impact on reducing hospital admissions and emergency department (ED) burden. Methods: This prospective cohort study involved 111 pediatric patients (aged 1–17 years) presenting with maxillofacial odontogenic infections to a tertiary care academic medical center. Following clinical evaluations, handheld POCUS assessments were performed by trained non-specialist clinicians. Findings from I&D or clinical resolution with antibiotics served as the reference standard. Ninety cases were included in the final diagnostic accuracy analysis after 21 exclusions. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and diagnostic accuracy with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Hospital admission trends were compared before (2017–2021) and after POCUS implementation (January 2022–April 2025). Interpretation should consider potential verification bias from the asymmetric reference standard (I&D for abscess vs. clinical resolution for cellulitis). Results: Handheld POCUS exhibited a sensitivity of 72.97% (95% CI: 57.02–84.60%), specificity of 73.58% (95% CI: 60.42–83.56%), PPV of 65.85% (95% CI: 50.55–78.44%), NPV of 79.59% (95% CI: 66.36–88.52%), and overall accuracy of 73.33% (95% CI: 63.38–81.38%). Following POCUS implementation, the annualized hospital admission rate for pediatric facial odontogenic infections decreased from 60.0 to 19.5 admissions/year; rate ratio (RR) = 0.33 (95% CI: 0.25–0.42), p < 0.001 (Poisson regression with log-offset for period length). Conclusions: Handheld POCUS, operated by non-specialist clinicians after a defined training protocol, was associated with a lower annualized admission rate and demonstrated moderate diagnostic accuracy. Its adoption was associated with a notable reduction in hospitalizations, suggesting its potential for alleviating ED overcrowding, reducing healthcare costs, and minimizing pediatric stress. Wider adoption, supported by standardized training, could enhance healthcare efficiency and quality in managing this common pediatric condition.

Background: Maxillary sinus lift is among the most common preprosthetic procedures in the posterior maxilla due to alveolar ridge resorption and the maxillary sinus pneumatization. It often extends treatment duration, significantly increases costs, and is not without complications. Objective: To explore the prevalence and morphology of the palatal bone reservoir as a viable site for dental implant insertion, offering a conservative alternative to avoid maxillary sinus lift. Methods: DICOM data sets from helical CT of maxillofacial trauma patients aged 50 years and older were used to perform virtual dental implant positioning in the edentulous second premolar, first molar, or second molar areas using ImplaStation software (version 5.3.2; ProDigiDent, Inc., Scottsdale, AZ, USA). A 3D Slicer software (version 5.3.2; ProDigiDent, Inc., Scottsdale, AZ, USA) was used to calculate the volume of the palatal bone reservoir and identify its mean density. The density of the residual alveolar process was also identified and compared with that of the previous one. Results: A total of 1822 maxillofacial trauma cases with helical CT between 2015 and 2025 were retrieved. After exclusion, 305 cases were analyzed. A total of 65 implants were virtually positioned in 50 patients. The mean volume of the palatal bone reservoir was 229 ± 139.2 mm³ with a mean radiodensity of 546.7 ± 159.6 HU. The mean radiodensity of the residual alveolar process was 286.3 ± 118.0 HU. The palatal bone reservoir was significantly denser than the residual alveolar process (95% CI [184.2, 336.6]; p < 0.01). Conclusions: The presence of a palatal bone reservoir is not uncommon and can offer a more conservative alternative for implant placement, potentially increasing primary stability and facilitating immediate loading.

Objective: Implant rehabilitation in grafted alveolar clefts requires a complex staged reconstructive approach, and a clinically important yet underexplored question is which patients require additional pre-implant block regrafting after primary grafting has already been completed. This single-centre retrospective cohort study aimed to evaluate whether a history of maxillary advancement is associated with a reduced likelihood of requiring pre-implant block regrafting (defined here as Re-graft 1), and to describe medium-term implant survival outcomes in a cleft implant cohort. Methods: Forty-two patients with Veau class III or IV cleft palate who underwent implant rehabilitation in grafted alveolar cleft sites between 2011 and 2023 were included. A total of 80 dental implants were evaluated at the implant level; analyses of primary grafting outcomes and the need for Re-graft 1 were performed at the patient level. Mean age at implant placement was 21.07 years (range, 17–38 years); mean follow-up was 83 months. Patients were categorised by maxillary advancement history: distraction osteogenesis (n = 11), orthognathic Le Fort I advancement (n = 9), or no advancement (n = 22). Bergland grades were assigned independently by two attending surgeons from postoperative radiographs. Implant outcomes were classified using the ICOI/Misch four-level scale (success, satisfactory survival, compromised survival, failure). Group comparisons used chi-square and Fisher’s exact tests. Results: Patients with any maxillary advancement history were significantly less likely to require Re-graft 1: 65.0% of patients with advancement did not require Re-graft 1, compared with 27.3% in the no-advancement group (Fisher’s exact p = 0.029; OR = 4.95). Overall implant survival was 93.75%; 58.75% of implants were classified as complete success, and 30.00% as satisfactory survival. Conclusions: In this observational, hypothesis-generating cohort, maxillary advancement history was associated with a lower likelihood of requiring pre-implant block regrafting. Implant rehabilitation showed favorable medium-term survival. These findings are limited by the retrospective single-center design, modest sample size, and absence of multivariable adjustment, and require confirmation in larger prospective studies with standardized regrafting criteria.