Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34336702›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in oncology2021

Adherence to Computer-Assisted Surgical Planning in 136 Maxillofacial Reconstructions.

Hongyang Ma, Sohaib Shujaat, Jeroen Van Dessel, Yi Sun, Michel Bila, Jan Vranckx, Constantinus Politis, Reinhilde Jacobs

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 23% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Hongyang MaOMFS IMPATH Research Group, Department of Imaging & Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Sohaib ShujaatOMFS IMPATH Research Group, Department of Imaging & Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Jeroen Van DesselOMFS IMPATH Research Group, Department of Imaging & Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Yi SunOMFS IMPATH Research Group, Department of Imaging & Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Michel BilaOMFS IMPATH Research Group, Department of Imaging & Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Jan VranckxDepartment of Plastic, Reconstructive, and Aesthetic Surgery, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Constantinus PolitisOMFS IMPATH Research Group, Department of Imaging & Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Reinhilde JacobsOMFS IMPATH Research Group, Department of Imaging & Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
KU Leuven · BEKarolinska Institutet · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

3D printingcomputer-assisted surgery (CAS)head and neckoral and maxillofacial reconstructionpatient-specific modeltreatment adherence and compliancevirtual surgical planning (VSP)

Identifiers

PMID34336702
PMCPMC8322949
OpenAlexW3187105682

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.