ArticleHead & face medicine2021
Esthetic and functional reconstruction of large mandibular defects using free fibula flap and implant-retained prosthetics - a case series with long-term follow-up.
Article in Head & face medicine, 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Radiographic Evaluation of Peri-Implant Bone Thickness in Fibular Mandible Reconstruction With Preoperative Occlusion-Driven Design.The Journal of craniofacial surgery · 2026Article
- Effect of reconstruction plate removal on dental implants in fibula flap mandibles: A biomechanical and clinical study.PloS one · 2026Article
- Assessment of hard tissue changes after horizontal guided bone regeneration with the aid of deep learning CBCT segmentation.Clinical oral investigations · 2025Article
- Comparison of mini-plate versus Kirschner wire internal fixation for fifth metacarpal basal fractures with carpometacarpal joint dislocation.American journal of translational research · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe reconstructive and rehabilitative management of large mandibular defects with basal continuity is challenging in many respects, especially in the vertical dimension. The free fibula flap is an under-utilised but efficient approach in this indication. The aim of this case series is to demonstrate its use and long-term success. CASE PRESENTATION: Three cases are presented, where the patient had a large bone defect (at least 5 cm in length and 1 cm in the vertical dimension), but the continuity of the mandible was maintained. Two cases were related to pathological fracture and one was a large defect due to oncological surgery. Vertical augmentation with free microvascularised fibula flap was carried out, followed by implant-retained prosthetic therapy. Clinical status has been followed up for 5 to 6 years, with special attention to the condition of the peri-implant tissues and any radiographically detectable alterations or complications. No complications occurred during the follow-up. Function and esthetics have remained unchanged throughout.
conclusionsFree microvascularised fibula flap reconstruction combined with implant-retained prosthetics allows a lasting functional and esthetic solution in the discussed indication.
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.