Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35752590›Full record

SynthesisJournal of plastic, reconstructive & aesthetic surgery : JPRAS2022

Mini-plate versus reconstruction bar fixation for oncologic mandibular reconstruction with free fibula flaps: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Nikhil Sobti, Kaleem S Ahmed, Thais Polanco, Marina Chilov, Marc A Cohen, Jay Boyle, Farooq Shahzad, Evan Matros, Jonas A Nelson, Robert J Allen

Open access · greenAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of plastic, reconstructive & aesthetic surgery : JPRAS, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
5.7field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

10 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Nikhil SobtiSection of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, NY, USA.
Kaleem S AhmedMedical College, Aga Khan University, Pakistan.
Thais PolancoSection of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, NY, USA.
Marina ChilovSection of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, NY, USA.
Marc A CohenMedical College, Aga Khan University, Pakistan.
Jay BoyleMedical College, Aga Khan University, Pakistan.
Farooq ShahzadSection of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, NY, USA.
Evan MatrosSection of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, NY, USA.
Jonas A NelsonSection of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, NY, USA. Electronic address: nelsonj1@mskcc.org.
Robert J AllenSection of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, NY, USA; Head and Neck Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, NY, USA. Electronic address: allenr1@mskcc.org.
Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center · USAga Khan University · PK

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Hongbiao Carl Lekaye · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction There is currently no consensus as to the comparative complication profiles of mini-plate (MP) and reconstruction bar (RB) osseous fixation in fibula flap mandibular reconstruction. The aim of this study is to compare complication rates associated with the use of MP versus RB fixation for vascularized fibula free flap (FFF) reconstruction of oncologic mandibular defects in an effort to better guide hardware utilization and pre-operative virtual surgical planning methods. Methods A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were queried to identify studies related to FFF-based mandibular reconstruction with either MP or RB fixation. Primary endpoints of interest were plate complications, wound infection, mal- or non-union, and total flap loss. Complication rates were calculated as weighted proportions and compared via Fisher's exact testing. Results Sixteen studies met inclusion criteria, which examined 1,513 patients. Only three studies directly compared MP fixation with RB fixation. MP fixation was used in 828 (54.7%) cases and RB fixation in 685 (45.3%) cases. MP fixation demonstrated greater rates of plate-related complications (32.5% versus 18.8%, p < 0.01, respectively), fistula formation (15.8% versus 4.7%, p = 0.04), total flap loss (9.4% versus 4.7%, p = 0.02), partial flap loss (20.6% versus 6.1%, p < 0.01), and re-operation for vascular compromise (13.3% versus 4.0%, p < 0.01). Rates of infection, mal-union/non-union, and wound dehiscence were similar across both groups. Conclusion Our results suggest that MP use may be associated with higher rates of plate-related complications. Though limited by outcome reporting heterogeneity, this review can serve as a template for future investigations evaluating the safety profiles of MP and RB fixation in head and neck surgery.

Indexed as

Free Tissue FlapsMandibular ReconstructionPlastic Surgery ProceduresBone PlatesBone TransplantationFibulaHumansMandiblePostoperative ComplicationsRetrospective StudiesFibular free flapMeta-analysisMini-plateOsseous FixationReconstruction Bar

Identifiers

PMID35752590
PMCPMC9391286
OpenAlexW4229075986

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.