ArticleCureus2024
Aesthetic Reconstruction Based on Facial Subunit Principle for Basal Cell Carcinoma of the Face: A Retrospective Analysis.
Article in Cureus, 2024. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Study Design, Reconstructive Modalities, and Patient-Reported Outcome Documentation in a Curated Corpus of Facial Basal Cell Carcinoma Reconstruction Studies: An Exploratory Meta-Research Analysis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Article
- Construction of a predictive model for the effectiveness of plastic surgery and repair in patients with facial basal cell carcinoma.American journal of cancer research · 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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and objective Basal cell carcinoma (BCC) is the most common malignancy of the skin. Reconstruction of post-excisional defects in BCC should follow the subunit principle for better outcomes. The location of BCC of the face is determined based on facial units; however, very few studies have described the involvement of multiple units and multiple subunits in BCC. In this study, we aimed to provide valuable insights into the management of BCC involving various facial units and subunits, thereby contributing to improved patient care and outcomes. Materials and methods We conducted a retrospective study at the Plastic Surgery Department of the SCB Medical College in Cuttack, Odisha, from January 2020 to January 2022, after obtaining ethical approval from the SCB Medical College IRB (no: 1155). We examined 35 patients with BCC of the face. The inclusion criteria were as follows: patients with early-stage and primary tumors that were mobile, not attached to underlying bone or cartilage, and amenable to surgical resection. Conversely, patients with late-stage, neglected, and recurrent tumors, fixed tumors, or those infiltrating the underlying bone or cartilage were excluded from the study. Data collection involved retrieving pertinent information from medical records, including parameters such as age, sex, tumor site, type of flap utilized, follow-up, and any complications observed. The tumor sites were further divided into six separate groups based on facial aesthetic units: the forehead, the nose, the area around the eyes, the cheek, the mouth, and the area around the ear, each with its own subunits. Results A total of 35 patients were included in this study, comprising 15 males (42.85%) and 20 females (57.15%), with a male-to-female ratio of 1:1.33. The ages of the patients ranged from 42 to 68 years. Among the facial units, the nose was the most commonly involved (in seven cases), while the lip was the least commonly affected (in one case). In 24 cases, a single unit was involved, while 11 cases involved multiple units. Furthermore, single subunits were affected in 18 cases, double subunits in 10 cases, three subunits in five cases, four subunits in one case, and five subunits in another case. Notably, no cases exhibited flap necrosis, wound dehiscence, wound hematoma, or seroma, indicating excellent surgical outcomes. All flaps remained viable, and all patients were followed up for a minimum of one year, with no reported recurrence during the follow-up period ranging from 6 to 18 months, reaffirming the effectiveness of the treatment approach. Conclusions For small, superficial lesions, full-thickness skin grafts (FTSG) are a suitable treatment option. However, when dealing with larger lesions that encompass multiple subunits, the preferred approach involves reconstructing with locoregional flaps. It is essential to plan the procedure carefully, taking into account the goal of positioning the final scar along the junction of facial subunits. This strategic plan aims to achieve superior aesthetic outcomes.
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.