Evolution and current status of microsurgical tongue reconstruction, part II.

Jong-Woo Choi, Feras Alshomer, Young-Chul Kim

Erratum issuedAbstract read

In one paragraph

Article in Archives of craniofacial surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

1citing papers in PubMed

–field-weighted citation impact

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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

Lingual pedicle intraoral anastomosis for tongue reconstruction after partial or hemiglossectomy: technical note and case report.Oral and maxillofacial surgery · 2026
Article

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

Erratum issued
Correction: Omission of informed consent statements for the use of photographs, errors in describing consent for using photographs of minors, and absence of statements regarding conflict of interest of editorial board membership.2024

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Jong-Woo ChoiDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.

Feras AlshomerDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.

Young-Chul KimDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Tongue reconstruction remains a major aspect of head and neck reconstructive procedures. Surgeons planning tongue reconstruction should consider several factors to optimize the overall outcomes. Specifically, various technical aspects related to tongue reconstruction have been found to affect the outcomes. Multidisciplinary teams dedicated to oncologic, reconstructive, and rehabilitative approaches play an essential role in the reconstructive process. Moreover, operative planning addressing certain patient-related and defect-related factors is crucial for optimizing functional speech and swallowing, as well as quality of life outcomes. Furthermore, tongue reconstruction is a delicate process, in which overall functional outcomes result from proper flap selection and shaping, recipient vessel preparation and anastomosis, surgical approaches to flap insetting, and postoperative management. The second part of this review summarizes these factors in relation to tongue reconstruction.

Indexed as

MicrosurgeryReconstructionTongue

Identifiers

PMID36373253

DOI10.7181/acfs.2022.00857

PMCPMC9663260

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata

LicenceCC BY-NC

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.