SynthesisOral and maxillofacial surgery2024
Comparative evaluation of nasolabial flap and buccal fat pad flap in the surgical management of oral submucous fibrosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Oral and maxillofacial surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Superiorly based nasolabial flap for closure of oronasal fistula: a case report.Journal of the Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons · 2026Article
- Amniotic membrane for oral surgical defect coverage: A clinical study.Bioinformation · 2026Article
- DPSCs regulate epithelial-T cell interactions in oral submucous fibrosis.Stem cell research & therapy · 2024Article
- Efficacy of Platysma Myocutaneous Flap in Advanced Oral Submucous Fibrosis - A Prospective Study.Annals of maxillofacial surgeryArticle
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 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeOral submucous fibrosis (OSMF) is a chronic, potentially malignant condition affecting any part of the oral cavity and is prevalent in Southeast Asia and the Indian subcontinent. The aim of this study is to compare the efficacy of buccal fat pad flap with the nasolabial flap in the management of OSMF.
methodsWe systematically compared two commonly used constructive techniques in the management of OSMF: the buccal pad of fat flap and the nasolabial flap. We performed a comprehensive search in four databases for all articles published between 1982 and November 2021. We assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane Handbook and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. We used the mean difference (MD) for pooling the data with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and evaluated the heterogeneity between pooled studies using χ
resultsOut of 917 studies, six were included in this review. The meta-analysis significantly favored conventional nasolabial flap over buccal fat pad flap in improving the maximal mouth opening (MD, - 2.52; 95% CI, - 4.44 to - 0.60; P = 0.01; I
conclusionOur meta-analysis found that nasolabial flap was better than buccal fat pad flap in terms of mouth opening restoration after OSMF reconstructive surgery. Also, the included studies found better results, favoring nasolabial flap over buccal fat pad flap in terms of oral commissural width restoration. Also, these studies reported better outcomes in terms of esthetics, favoring buccal fat pad flap. Further studies with larger sample sizes and different populations/races are needed to confirm our findings.
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.