ArticleMedicine2019
Evaluation of quality of life in patients with oral cancer after mandibular resection: Comparing no reconstruction, reconstruction with plate, and reconstruction with flap.
Article in Medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development of a universal cutting guide for raising deep circumflex iliac artery flaps.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2024Article
- Accuracy of the surgical execution of virtually planned deep circumflex iliac artery flaps and their appropriateness for masticatory rehabilitation.Head & face medicine · 2024Article
- Longitudinal Assessment of the Quality of Life in Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma Patients.Cureus · 2024Article
- The Perfect Timing-Immediate versus Delayed Microvascular Reconstruction of the Mandible.Cancers · 2024Article
- On a pathway to resigned acceptance: Patients' experiences of living with symptom clusters in oral cancer.European journal of oncology nursing : the official journal of European Oncology Nursing Society · 2023Article
- Oral Health Management and Rehabilitation for Patients with Oral Cancer: A Narrative Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Quality of Life in Patients With Tongue Cancer After Surgical Treatment: A 12-Month Prospective Study.Cureus · 2022Article
- Health-Related Quality of Life in Oral Cancer Patients: Scoping Review and Critical Appraisal of Investigated Determinants.Cancers · 2021Article
- Intensive Care as an Independent Risk Factor for Infection after Reconstruction and Augmentation with Autologous Bone Grafts in Craniomaxillofacial Surgery: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- The Azeri Version of European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Core Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30): Translation and Validation.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2020Article
- Article
- Locally Advanced Oral Cavity Cancers: What Is The Optimal Care?Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer CenterReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This cross-sectional study aimed to assess and compare quality of life in patients with advanced oral cavity tumors after mandibular resection in 3 groups (no reconstruction, reconstruction with plate, and reconstruction with flap) at the Cancer Institute, affiliated to Tehran University of Medical Sciences. Quality of life was measured using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer core quality of life questionnaire and European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer head and neck cancer-specific quality of life questionnaire-35 items. The comparison was tested using Kurskal-Wallis analysis. All 120 patients were entered into the study. The mean age of patients was 48.5 (standard deviation = 18.1) years. Patients presented with advanced stage of the disease and underwent mandibular resection with no reconstruction (n = 40), reconstruction with plate (n = 41), and reconstruction with flap (n = 39). The findings showed that in general, there were no statistically significant differences in quality of life among 3 groups except for speech problem (P = .4), dry mouth (P = .03), and feeling ill (P = .04). Although there were no significant differences in quality of life among patients in 3 groups, overall patients who received reconstruction with flap reported better functioning and fewer symptoms. Those who did not receive any reconstruction reported the worse conditions.
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.