ArticleJournal of maxillofacial and oral surgery2022
Management of Massive Mandibular Fibrous Dysplasia with Radical Excision and Different Immediate Reconstructive Modalities: Case Series Report.
Article in Journal of maxillofacial and oral surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Treatment approach with clinical follow-up in monostotic fibrous dysplasia: a case series.Journal of medical case reports · 2025Article
- Fully Digital Workflow for Immediate Prosthetic Implant on Microsurgery Fibula Flap for Mandibular Reconstruction.Medical archives (Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina) · 2025Article
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 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To review and represent three different mandibular reconstruction modalities following surgical treatment of massive mandibular fibrous Dysplasia (MMFD). Methods: The present retrospective case series study was conducted on 24 patients who had MMFD and treated via resection and immediate reconstruction at Al-Azhar University Hospitals, Egypt. Patients were divided into three groups according to the grafting procedure. Group I patients were grafted with iliac bone graft (IBG), group II patients were grafted with IBG and bone marrow aspirate concentrate (BMAC), while group III patients were grafted with free vascularized fibula graft (FVFG). Postoperative clinical and radiographic assessments were performed immediately, at 6 months, 12 months and 2 years to evaluate lesion recurrence and bone graft resorption. Other study variables included assessment of postoperative wound dehiscence, infection rate, amount of edema, and facial bone contour. Results: The parameters of the clinical analysis showed non-statistically significant differences among all groups. Postoperative wound healing was clinically uneventful in all groups, except for two cases of wound dehiscence in group I (8.3%) and one case in group III (4.2%). Most patients had appropriate postoperative facial contour, and adequate facial symmetry. The radiographic measurements revealed a highly statistically significant difference between group I and II at 12 months, and two years, without any statistically significant difference between group II and III. Conclusion: MMFD surgical defect should be repaired for function and cosmetics aims especially in young adult patients. The findings of the present study have shown that when compared to traditional IBG alone or FVFG, the use of autogenous IBG with BMAC injection produces a favorable outcome with few difficulties.
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.