ArticleOrbit (Amsterdam, Netherlands)2024
Difficulties of nasocutaneous fistula repair, following lacrimal outflow system malignancy resection.
Article in Orbit (Amsterdam, Netherlands), 2024. 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Orbital cutaneous fistula as a delayed complication after fracture repair surgery: a case-based literature review.BMC ophthalmology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the incidence of nasocutaneous fistula (NCF) development, following en bloc resection of lacrimal outflow system malignancies (LOSM), and describe the methods of surgical repair.
methodsRetrospective review of all patients who underwent resection of LOSM with reconstruction and post-treatment protocol at the University of Miami between 1997 and 2021.
resultsOf the 23 included patients, 10 (43%) developed postoperative NCF. All NCFs developed within one year of surgical resection or completion of radiation therapy. NCF was seen more frequently in patients who underwent adjuvant radiation therapy and those who had reconstruction of the orbital wall with titanium implants. All patients underwent at least one revisional surgery to close the NCF, including local flap transposition (9/10), paramedian forehead flap (5/10), pericranial flap (1/10), nasoseptal flap (2/10), and microvascular free flap (1/10). Local tissue transfer, pericranial, paramedian, and nasoseptal forehead flaps failed in most cases. Two patients had long-term closure; one patient who underwent a paramedian flap and a second who underwent a radial forearm free flap, suggesting that well-vascularized flaps may be the most viable option for repair.
conclusionsNCF is a known complication, following en bloc resection of lacrimal outflow system malignancies. Risk factors for formation may include adjuvant radiation therapy and use of titanium implants for reconstruction. Surgeons should consider utilizing robust vascular-pedicled flaps or microvascular free flaps for repair of NCF in this clinical scenario.
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.