The mylohyoid bridge: a meta-analysis of its prevalence and clinical significance
In brief
Ossified mylohyoid bridges appear in 14% of mandibles
A meta-analysis of 17 studies found the bony bridge in about 14% of mandibles and 10% of sides. Estimates varied widely across studies, and the evidence came entirely from skeletal specimens, so prevalence in living patients is uncertain. The finding may matter for anesthesia and surgery, but direct evidence of effects on clinical outcomes remains limited.
- Journal
- Anatomical science international (Q2)
- Published
- 5 October 2026
- Study design
- Systematic review of cohort studies
- Evidence level
- Level 2, Moderate (CEBM 2a)
- Authors
- Maria Piagkou, George Triantafyllou, Ibrahim Alzir, Rǎzvan-Costin Tudose, Nikolaos Kolomvos, Eleni Kokkou, et al.
- PMID
- 42832164
- DOI
- 10.1007/s12565-026-00975-1
Why clinicians should know about it
- Picked for Anatomy (top studies of the week, 11 October 2026): Meta‑analysis of mylohyoid bridge prevalence and significance
Abstract
The mylohyoid bridge (MHB) is an ossified roof over part or all of the mylohyoid groove that may alter the osseous corridor of the mylohyoid neurovascular bundle. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated its prevalence, morphological patterns, and craniomaxillofacial relevance. We searched MEDLINE (PubMed), Scopus, and Web of Science through May 2026, supplemented by reference-list and targeted journal searches. Seventeen studies were included. In accordance with evidence-based anatomy recommendations, we analyzed mandible-level and side-level prevalence as separate reporting-unit subgroups using random-effects models with inverse-variance weighting, Freeman-Tukey double-arcsine transformation, and DerSimonian-Laird estimation. Pooled prevalence was 14.11% per mandible (95% CI 8.75-20.45%; I²=90%) and 10.20% per side (95% CI 7.07-13.80%; I²=93.1%). No significant subgroup differences were detected between left and right sides or between sexes; the exploratory descriptive evaluations indicated a higher pooled prevalence for unilateral than bilateral presentation (8.55% vs. 3.77%). The evidence base was entirely osteological, and marked heterogeneity limits extrapolation of a single universal prevalence. The MHB is not rare and has proposed anesthetic and surgical relevance, although direct outcome-based clinical evidence remains limited.
Abstract as published, via PubMed.
For healthcare professionals. The summary is generated by AI from the published abstract, and the evidence level is assigned automatically from the study design on the Oxford CEBM hierarchy. Neither is medical advice. Read the full paper before changing practice.