ReviewArchives of craniofacial surgery2016
Oral and Oropharyngeal Reconstruction with a Free Flap.
Review in Archives of craniofacial surgery, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Postoperative Outcome of Prelaminated Radial Forearm Free Flap for Soft Palate Reconstruction.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2025Article
- Surgical outcomes of suprafascial and subfascial radial forearm free flaps in head and neck reconstruction.Archives of craniofacial surgery · 2023Article
- Evolution and current status of microsurgical tongue reconstruction, part II.Archives of craniofacial surgery · 2022Article
- Current status and evolution of microsurgical tongue reconstructions, part I.Archives of craniofacial surgery · 2022Article
- Reconstructive methods to resolve intractable fistulas that develop after radiation therapy in patients with head and neck cancer.Archives of craniofacial surgery · 2021Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Extensive surgical resection of the aerodigestive track can result in a large and complex defect of the oropharynx, which represents a significant reconstructive challenge for the plastic surgery. Development of microsurgical techniques has allowed for free flap reconstruction of oropharyngeal defects, with superior outcomes as well as decreases in postoperative complications. The reconstructive goals for oral and oropharyngeal defects are to restore the anatomy, to maintain continuity of the intraoral surface and oropharynx, to protect vital structures such as carotid arteries, to cover exposed portions of internal organs in preparation for adjuvant radiation, and to preserve complex functions of the oral cavity and oropharynx. Oral and oropharyngeal cancers should be treated with consideration of functional recovery. Multidisciplinary treatment strategies are necessary for maximizing disease control and preserving the natural form and function of the oropharynx.
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.