ReviewNational journal of maxillofacial surgery
Clinical indications for radical resection of odontogenic keratocyst: A systematic review.
Review in National journal of maxillofacial surgery. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Podoplanin immunoexpression in odontogenic lesions: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and integrated bioinformatic analysis.Diagnostic pathology · 2024Pooled it
- Article
- Conservative management of large mandibular odontogenic keratocysts using decompression and enucleation: a two-case report.Frontiers in dental medicine · 2026Article
- A recurrence odontogenic keratocyst formation of mandible with distinctive features: a case report.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 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 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to identify clinico pathological indications for radical resection of odontogenic keratocysts (OKCs) in the literature and formulate clinical guidelines for the management of OKCs based on these findings. A systematic review of the literature was undertaken in September 2021 in PubMed/Medline, Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and Cochrane databases. The following MeSH Keywords terms were used in the search strategies: (odontogenic keratocyst) OR (keratocystic odontogenic tumor) OR (primordial cyst) AND (treatment) OR (Radical resection) OR (Resection of OKC) OR (Treatment methods). Eligibility criteria included publications of clinical studies on histologically confirmed OKCs which underwent radical resection. Studies with less than 5 OKCs, experimental studies, epidemiological studies, studies that included orthokeratinized odontogenic cyst, and review papers were excluded. Ten studies on OKCs reporting on segmental or marginal resections were identified and analyzed qualitatively. Of the total of 221 OKCs that underwent radical resection, 67 OKCs were primary, 30 were recurrent, and the remaining were unclear whether they were primary or recurrent. Segmental mandibulectomy was performed in 131 OKCs, marginal mandibulectomy in 87 OKCs, and 3 OKCs were treated by partial maxillectomy. The main indications for radical resection were multilocular appearance, large OKCs (> 5 cm), multiple recurrent OKCs with or without cortical perforation, and malignant transformation. In conclusion, radical resection has its place in the management of OKC. It is indicated when there is an aggressive lesion with bony perforation, involvement of the pterygoid musculature or skull base, and malignant transformation. The surgeon should aim to identify these features to manage OKC appropriately and to prevent multiple recurrences. Clinical guidelines for the management of OKCs are proposed.
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.