ArticleJournal of otolaryngology - head & neck surgery = Le Journal d'oto-rhino-laryngologie et de chirurgie cervico-faciale2017
Transoral robotic surgery with radial forearm free flap reconstruction: case control analysis.
Article in Journal of otolaryngology - head & neck surgery = Le Journal d'oto-rhino-laryngologie et de chirurgie cervico-faciale, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
24 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 56 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evidence-based guideline diagnosis, treatment, prevention and aftercare of oropharyngeal and hypopharyngeal carcinoma.German medical science : GMS e-journal · 2025Guideline
- Characteristics and outcomes of transoral robotic surgery with free-flap reconstruction for oropharyngeal cancer: a systematic review.Journal of robotic surgery · 2023Pooled it
- Transoral Robotic Surgery (TORS) in Head and Neck Reconstruction.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Intraoperative and Short-Term Postoperative Outcomes Associated With Transoral Robotic Surgery: A Protocol for a Scoping Review.Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica · 2025Article
- A Bibliometric Analysis of HPV-Positive Oropharyngeal Squamous Cell Carcinoma from 2000 to 2023.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Recent Advancements in Robotic-assisted Plastic Surgery Procedures: A Systematic Review.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2025Article
- Role of TORS as De-Escalation Strategy in HPV-Related Oropharyngeal Cancer, What We Need to Know.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Robotics in Microsurgery and Supermicrosurgery.Seminars in plastic surgery · 2023Review
- Does Combined Access Mandibulotomy, Rim Mandibulectomy and Neck Dissection Compound the Late Effects of Radiotherapy?Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2023Article
- Practice patterns in transoral robotic surgery: results of an American head and neck society survey.Journal of robotic surgery · 2023Article
- Evolution and current status of microsurgical tongue reconstruction, part II.Archives of craniofacial surgery · 2022Article
- A national study of choanal atresia in tertiary care centers in Canada - part II: clinical management.Journal of otolaryngology - head & neck surgery = Le Journal d'oto-rhino-laryngologie et de chirurgie cervico-faciale · 2021Article
- A national study of choanal atresia in tertiary care centers in Canada - part I: clinical presentation.Journal of otolaryngology - head & neck surgery = Le Journal d'oto-rhino-laryngologie et de chirurgie cervico-faciale · 2021Article
- Indications and Clinical Outcomes of Transoral Robotic Surgery and Free Flap Reconstruction.Cancers · 2021Article
- Improving exposure for transoral oropharyngeal surgery with the floor of mouth window: a cadaveric feasibility study.Journal of otolaryngology - head & neck surgery = Le Journal d'oto-rhino-laryngologie et de chirurgie cervico-faciale · 2019Article
- Long-term survival and swallowing outcomes in advanced stage oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinomas.Papillomavirus research (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2019Article
- The impact of human papillomavirus (HPV) status on functional outcomes and quality of life (QOL) after surgical treatment of oropharyngeal carcinoma with free-flap reconstruction.Journal of otolaryngology - head & neck surgery = Le Journal d'oto-rhino-laryngologie et de chirurgie cervico-faciale · 2018Article
- Robotics in oral and maxillofacial surgery.Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England · 2018Review
- Multi-dimensional analysis of oral cavity and oropharyngeal defects following cancer extirpation surgery, a cadaveric study.Journal of otolaryngology - head & neck surgery = Le Journal d'oto-rhino-laryngologie et de chirurgie cervico-faciale · 2018Article
- [Robotic Surgery - Who is The Boss?]Laryngo- rhino- otologie · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe resection of large oropharyngeal tumors traditionally involves a lip-splitting mandibulotomy for adequate margin visualization and free flap reconstruction of the surgical defect. Transoral robotic surgery (TORS) has emerged as a technique that can resect large and complex oropharyngeal tumors, avoiding a lip-splitting approach. The aim of this study is to compare the lip-splitting mandibulotomy approach versus TORS for the management of advanced stage oropharyngeal carcinomas.
methodsProspectively collected data from 18 patients with advanced stage oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC) who received TORS with radial forearm free flap reconstruction (RFFF) was compared to a matched cohort of 39 patients who received a lip-splitting mandibulotomy and RFFF. Patients were matched for stage, p16 positivity, smoking, age and gender. Length of hospital stay (LOHS), tracheostomy decanulation time, operative time, surgical margin status, and post-operative complications were compared between groups.
resultsPatients who received TORS with RFFF had a significantly lower mean LOHS, compared to patients who were treated by lip-splitting mandibulotomy and RFFF (14.4 vs 19.7 days, p = 0.03). No significant differences were seen between groups in terms of operative time, tracheostomy decannulation time, margin positivity and post-operative complications.
conclusionTORS with radial forearm free flap reconstruction is a safe, effective and cost-saving alternative to the lip-splitting mandibulotomy approach for the treatment of advanced stage OPSCC.
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.