ArticleOral and maxillofacial surgery2023
Pedicled buccal flaps as a backup procedure for intraoral reconstruction.
Article in Oral and maxillofacial surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIntraoral soft tissue deficiency and impaired wound beds are common problems after cleft and tumour surgery or after dental trauma. Frequently, limited defects are overtreated with extensive microvascular reconstruction procedures, but pedicled flaps remain useful, as they are simple to harvest, and they provide a reliable outcome. The buccal flap, first described in the 1970s, has been used for palatine lengthening in cleft patients over decades. In the following, we present an expanded indication in cases of palatal fistula, complex vestibulum, exposed bone in orthognathic surgery, and osteoradionecrosis.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective chart review and report on all buccal flaps harvested in our department within the last 3 years with a follow-up period of at least half a year after flap surgery. Patients of all age groups and treatment indications in which a buccal flap was used were implicated in the evaluation.
resultsSixteen buccal flaps were performed in 10 patients. The median age at the time of surgery was 42 years, reaching from 12 up to 66 years. Fourteen buccal flaps were used for upper jaw or palatal coverage; two buccal flaps were used in the mandible. In terms of complications (four flaps; 25%), there were two partial flap failures, one wound dehiscence and one wound dehiscence. There were no failures of the remaining mucosal flap islands after pedicle dissection.
conclusionThe buccal flap is a reliable and straightforward approach to challenging intraoral wound beds with soft tissue deficiency. We thoroughly discuss the additional indications for buccal flap surgery, describe the harvest technique, and provide strategies to prevent intra- and postoperative complications.
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.