ArticleJournal of maxillofacial and oral surgery2021
Choice of Regional Flaps for Oral Cancer Defects: Relevance in Current Era.
Article in Journal of maxillofacial and oral surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A retrospective propensity score-matched analysis of oncological and functional outcomes of submental island flap versus radial forearm free flap for oral cavity cancer reconstruction.BMC oral health · 2024Article
- Pedicled Flaps versus Free Flaps for Oral Cavity Cancer Reconstruction: A Comparison of Complications, Hospital Costs, and Functional Outcomes.International archives of otorhinolaryngology · 2023Article
- Advances and Controversies in the Management of Osteoradionecrosis After Head and Neck Cancer Treatment: A Narrative Review.Journal of maxillofacial and oral surgery · 2022Review
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
introductionMicrovascular free flaps (MVFF) are the current standard of care for reconstruction of oral ablative defects; however, pedicled myocutaneous flaps (PMCF) are still used widely in India. The rationale behind the preference for selecting PMCF in the present era is not well understood. The associated complications and swallowing outcomes are variable.
methodsWe retrospectively analysed the records of patients who underwent reconstructive surgery for oral cancer ablative defects over a 3-year period.
resultsNinety-seven pedicled myocutaneous flaps [89 pectoralis major myocutaneous (PMMC) flaps, eight lower trapezius island myocutaneous (TMC) flaps] and 113 MVFFs were performed. The reasons for selecting PMCF were financial constraints 38.7%, MVFF salvage 22.5%, medically compromised 10.7%, vessel-depleted neck 6.4%, old age with PS2 + 5.3%, early recurrence 5.3%, borderline resectable 4.3%, palliative resection 2.1%. Overall complication rate was 20.4%. Of patients, 50.7% and 34.7% were on regular and semisolid diet, respectively; 66.6% had acceptable swallowing-related social well-being.
conclusionPMCFs have an important role in developing countries with patients having financial constraints. The other potential reasons driven by patient factors were discussed. The swallowing outcomes are good, with majority of the people having socially acceptable swallowing function.
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.