ReviewJournal of maxillofacial and oral surgery2023
Post-reconstruction Free Flap Complications After Oral Cancer Ablation.
Review in Journal of maxillofacial and oral 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pedicle ossification after fibular flap reconstruction of maxillary defects: A case report and literature review.Clinical case reports · 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
Introduction: Microvascular free flap transfer is considered a standard reconstruction after the ablation of oral cancer. Although the success rate is high, flap complications occasionally occur. This study investigated the reasons for and local factors involved in complications of free flap transfer and explored how to salvage the flaps. Patients and Methods: The cases of 53 patients who underwent a free flap transfer [radial forearm flaps ( Results: In the all five cases, a salvage operation was performed under general anesthesia. The flap complications occurred within 33 h after anastomosis. In the salvage operation, thrombotic occlusion in veins of flap feeders was observed in three of the five cases. The possible reasons for flap complications were a twisting of the anastomosed vein where two veins were united, pressure to the feeder due to subcutaneous hematoma, and edema of adjacent tissue and/or drain tube; the reason was not clear in one case. The flaps were successfully salvaged in four cases by thrombectomy in veins, release of pressure at the veins, and/or interposition of the vein graft. Conclusion: Surgeons should pay close attention to the pressure and/or twisting in the feeder as well as the hemostasis in the surgical field, and a salvage operation should be carried out immediately when a flap complication is identified.
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.