ArticleNeurologia medico-chirurgica2019
Watertight Robust Osteoconductive Barrier for Complex Skull Base Reconstruction: An Expanded-endoscopic Endonasal Experimental Study.
Article in Neurologia medico-chirurgica, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Reconstruction of Clival Defects using Vascularized Free and Pedicled Flaps: Systematic Review and Proposed Algorithms.Journal of neurological surgery. Part B, Skull base · 2026Article
- Simulation of Pediatric Anterior Skull Base Anatomy Using a 3D Printed Model.World neurosurgery · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Endoscopic skull base reconstruction (ESBR) following expanded-endoscopic endonasal approaches (EEA) in high-risk non-ideal endoscopic reconstructive candidates remains extremely challenging, and further innovations are still necessary. Here, the aim is to study the reconstructive knowledge gap following expanded-EEA and to introduce the watertight robust osteoconductive (WRO)-barrier as an alternative durable option. Distinctively, we focused on 10 clinical circumstances. A 3D-skull base-water system model was innovated to investigate the ESBR under realistic conditions. A large-irregular defect (31 × 89 mm) extending from the crista galli to the mid-clivus was achieved. Then, WRO-barrier was fashioned and its tolerance was evaluated under stressful settings, including an exceedingly high (55 cmH
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.