ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2019
Nonmicrosurgical Grafting for Facial Nerve Branches with Permanent Sensational Functional Outcome.
Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- A comprehensive review of the great auricular nerve graft.Neurosurgical review · 2021Review
- Recent update on craniofacial tissue engineering.Journal of tissue engineeringReview
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
A 49-year-old man underwent intraoperatively modified procedure from superficial to radical parotidectomy with excision of the facial nerve 4 branches, temporal, zygomatic, buccal, and mandibular. We have dissected and harvested the branches of the great auricular nerve to repair the defects of the temporal, zygomatic, buccal, and mandibular nerves without microsurgery aid. The aims of the repair were just to mark the nerve endings, to try autologous grafting, and to avoid neuroma(s) formation, although neuroma(s) formations from motor nerves are rare. We did an immediate temporary nonmicrosurgical nerve grafting, and we have sutured each nerve anastomosis by 2-3 stitches of Prolene 6-0. We have observed facial nerve branches' recovery on the second month, even with radiation therapy, and then gradually more improvements on the third month and then on the sixth month of the follow-up. Finally, the procedure results in permanent sensational functional outcome after 1 year. Because we did not plan a microsurgical repair, this case report does not support any intended nonmicrosurgical procedures for facial nerve repair, but it raises questions for laboratory and animal investigations about the size of Prolene we have used, grip repair taking the epineurium and fascicle in mass closure, and the positive fast functional results. In surgical environments where microscope or microinstruments are lacking, one can still perform primary nerve grafting.
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.