Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37881603›Full record

ReviewBiomedical reports2023

Research trends and perspectives on immediate facial reanimation in radical parotidectomy (Review).

Iulian Filipov, Lucian Chirila, Federico Bolognesi, Mihai Sandulescu, Sergiu Drafta, Corina Marilena Cristache

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Biomedical reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 25% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. From fracture-related injury to surgically modifiable risk: a trauma-focused bibliometric analysis of craniofacial nerve injuries.Ulusal travma ve acil cerrahi dergisi = Turkish journal of trauma & emergency surgery : TJTES · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Trends in Facial Reanimation Surgery: A Bibliometric Analysis.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Iulian FilipovDoctoral School, 'Carol Davila' University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 020021 Bucharest, Romania.
Lucian ChirilaDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 'Carol Davila' University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 010221 Bucharest, Romania.
Federico BolognesiOral and Maxillo-Facial Surgery Unit, IRCCS Policlinico di Sant'Orsola, I-40138 Bologna, Italy.
Mihai SandulescuDepartment of Implant Prosthetic Therapy, Faculty of Dental Medicine, 'Carol Davila' University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 010221 Bucharest, Romania.
Sergiu DraftaDepartment of Fixed Dental Prosthetics and Occlusion, Faculty of Dental Medicine, 'Carol Davila' University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 010221 Bucharest, Romania.
Corina Marilena CristacheDepartment of Dental Techniques, 'Carol Davila' University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 050474 Bucharest, Romania.
Carol Davila University of Medicine and Pharmacy · ROIstituti di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

For patients diagnosed with advanced malignant parotid tumour, radical parotidectomy with facial nerve sacrifice is part of the treatment. Multiple surgical techniques have been developed to cure facial paralysis in order to restore the function and aesthetics of the face. Despite the large number of publications over time on facial nerve reanimation, a consensus on the timing of the procedure or the donor graft selection has remained to be established. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to conduct a bibliometric analysis to identify and analyse scientific publications on the reconstruction of the facial nerve of patients who underwent radical parotidectomy with facial nerve sacrifice. The analysis on the topic was conducted using the built-in tool of the Scopus database and VOSviewer software. The first 100 most cited articles were separately reviewed to address the aim of the study. No consensus was found regarding the recommended surgical techniques for facial nerve reanimation. The most used donor cranial nerves for transfer included the following: Masseteric branch of the V nerve, contralateral VII nerve with cross-face graft, the XI nerve and the XII nerve. The best timing of surgery is also controversial depending on pre-exiting pathology and degree of nerve degeneration. However, most of the clinical experience suggests facial nerve restoration immediately after the ablative procedure to reduce complications and improve patients' quality of life.

Indexed as

bibliometric analysisfacial nerve sacrificefacial reanimationparotid malignancy

Identifiers

PMID37881603
PMCPMC10594070
OpenAlexW4386929474

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.