ArticleFrontiers in oncology2021
Adherence to Computer-Assisted Surgical Planning in 136 Maxillofacial Reconstructions.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Virtual Surgical Planning (VSP) in Orthognathic Surgery for Non-Syndromic Cleft Patients: A Scoping Review of Trends and Clinical Outcomes.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Robot-Assisted Osteotomy and Reconstruction with AR Guidance in Maxillofacial Reconstructive Surgery.Cyborg and bionic systems (Washington, D.C.) · 2026Article
- Current Trends in the Reconstruction and Rehabilitation of Jaw following Ablative Surgery.Cancers · 2022Review
- Unexpected Change of Surgical Plans and Contingency Strategies in Computer-Assisted Free Flap Jaw Reconstruction: Lessons Learned From 98 Consecutive Cases.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo investigate the adherence to initially planned maxillofacial reconstructions using computer-assisted surgery (CAS) and to identify the influential factors affecting its compliance for maxillofacial reconstruction. PATIENTS AND
methodsA retrospective analysis of 136 computer-assisted maxillofacial reconstructive surgeries was conducted from January 2014 to June 2020. The categorical parameters involved age, gender, disease etiology, disease site, defect size, bone flap segments, and flap type. Apart from descriptive data reporting, categorical data were related by applying the Fisher-exact test, and a p-value below 5% was considered statistically significant (P < 0.05).
resultsThe main reasons for partial or non-adherence included unfitness, patient health condition, and other subjective reasons. Out of the total patient population, 118 patients who underwent mandibular reconstruction showed higher CAS compliance (83.9%) compared to the 18 midface reconstruction (72.2%) without any statistically significant difference (p = 0.361). Based on the size of the defect, a significantly higher CAS compliance (p = 0.031) was observed with a minor defect (80.6%) compared to the large-sized ones (74.1%). The bone flaps with two or more segments were significantly (p = 0.003) prone to observe a partial (15.4%) or complete (12.8%) discard of the planned CAS compared to the bone flaps with less than two segments. The malignant tumors showed the lowest CAS compliance when compared to other disorders without any significant difference (p = 0.1).
conclusionThe maxillofacial reconstructive surgical procedures offered optimal compliance to the initially planned CAS. However, large-sized defects and multiple bone flap segments demonstrated a higher risk of partial or complete abandonment of the CAS.
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.