ReviewCancers2023
Orbital Exenteration for Craniofacial Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Patient Characteristics and Survival Outcomes.
Review in Cancers, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Survival outcomes after orbital exenteration for recurrent or previously treated orbital malignancies: impact of margin status and metastatic spread.Oral and maxillofacial surgery · 2026Article
- Treatment and Survival Outcomes in Rhino-Orbital Mucormycosis with and without Orbital Exenteration: A Retrospective Case Series and Literature Review.International medical case reports journal · 2025Article
- Survival of Patients with Sinonasal Cancers in a Population-Based Registry, Lombardy, Italy, 2008-2023.Cancers · 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
13 authors at 10 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe outcomes of orbital exenteration (OE) in patients with craniofacial lesions (CFLs) remain unclear. The present review summarizes the available literature on the clinical outcomes of OE, including surgical outcomes and overall survival (OS).
methodsRelevant articles were retrieved from Medline, Scopus, and Cochrane according to PRISMA guidelines. A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted on the clinical characteristics, management, and outcomes.
resultsA total of 33 articles containing 957 patients who underwent OE for CFLs were included (weighted mean age: 64.3 years [95% CI: 59.9-68.7]; 58.3% were male). The most common lesion was squamous cell carcinoma (31.8%), and the most common symptom was disturbed vision/reduced visual acuity (22.5%). Of the patients, 302 (31.6%) had total OE, 248 (26.0%) had extended OE, and 87 (9.0%) had subtotal OE. Free flaps (33.3%), endosseous implants (22.8%), and split-thickness skin grafts (17.2%) were the most used reconstructive methods. Sino-orbital or sino-nasal fistula (22.6%), flap or graft failure (16.9%), and hyperostosis (13%) were the most reported complications. Regarding tumor recurrences, 38.6% were local, 32.3% were distant, and 6.7% were regional. The perineural invasion rate was 17.4%, while the lymphovascular invasion rate was 5.0%. Over a weighted mean follow-up period of 23.6 months (95% CI: 13.8-33.4), a weighted overall mortality rate of 39% (95% CI: 28-50%) was observed. The 5-year OS rate was 50% (median: 61 months [95% CI: 46-83]). The OS multivariable analysis did not show any significant findings.
conclusionsAlthough OE is a disfiguring procedure with devastating outcomes, it is a viable option for carefully selected patients with advanced CFLs. A patient-tailored approach based on tumor pathology, extension, and overall patient condition is warranted.
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.