ArticleJournal of maxillofacial and oral surgery2024
Flap Design for Cranial Reconstruction: An Analysis of Craniectomy and Cranioplasty Incisions.
Article in Journal of maxillofacial and oral surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Complications of Alloplastic Graft Materials Used in Cranioplasty: Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2026Pooled it
- Early osteointegration in "one-step" resection and reconstruction using porous hydroxyapatite custom implants for skull-infiltrating tumors: a monocentric prospective series.Acta neurochirurgica · 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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The surgical approach for cranial reconstruction is influenced by the presence of pre-existing scar tissue. Scars that lie within the vicinity of cranial defect require modification. Purpose: The present study was conducted to analyse co-relation between craniectomy scar and cranioplasty incision. Materials and Methods: A retrospective evaluation of 70 patients who were divided into three groups based on location of cranioplasty incision line was done. In group I, incision was located parallel and outside the scar; group II, incision was located over the scar; and group III, mixed and criss-cross incision was present. The primary outcome variable of interest was to analyse co-relation between craniectomy and cranioplasty incisions. Results: There were 45 cases of group I, 15 cases of group II and 10 cases of group III. Thirty-three patients had defect on left side, 26 had on right side, and 10 had bifrontal defect. No significant association was noted between the site and cranioplasty incision (Chi Conclusion: Well-vascularized broad-based scalp flap that provides adequate exposure and located on healthy bone irrespective of pre-existing craniectomy scar forms the mainstay of successful cranial reconstruction.
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.