Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38665951›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in oncology2024

Reconstructive flap surgery in head and neck cancer patients: an interdisciplinary view of the challenges encountered by radiation oncologists in postoperative radiotherapy.

Juliette Thariat, Florent Carsuzaa, Arnaud Beddok, Sophie Deneuve, Pierre-Yves Marcy, Anna Merlotti, Catherine Dejean, Bernard Devauchelle

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
11.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Prehabilitation in Head and Neck Surgery and Reconstruction.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

8 authors at 8 institutions in 4 countries.

Juliette ThariatDepartment of Radiotherapy, Centre François-Baclesse, Caen, France.
Florent CarsuzaaDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, University Hospital of Poitiers, Poitiers, France.
Arnaud BeddokInstitut Curie, PSL Research University, University Paris Saclay, Inserm LITO, Orsay, France.
Sophie DeneuveSurgical Oncology Department, Centre Léon Bérard, UNICANCER, Lyon, France.
Pierre-Yves MarcyPolyclinics ELSAN Group, Department of Radiodiagnostics and Interventional Imaging, PolyClinics Les Fleurs, Ollioules, France.
Anna MerlottiRadiotherapy Department, S. Croce & Carle Teaching Hospital, Cuneo, Italy.
Catherine DejeanRadioophysics, Centre Lacassagne, Nice, France.
Bernard DevauchelleDepartement of Maxillofacial Surgery, University Hospital of Amiens Picardy, Research Unit, UR7516 CHIMERE, University of Picardy Jules Verne, Institut Faire Faces, Amiens, France.
Azienda Sanitaria Ospedaliera S.Croce e Carle Cuneo · ITCentre Antoine Lacassagne · FRCentre National de la Recherche Scientifique · FRChirurgie et extrémité céphalique, caractérisation morphologique et fonctionnelle · FRHarvard University · USInserm · FRPolyclinic General Hospital · GRUniversité de Poitiers · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Major advances have been made in reconstructive surgery in the last decades to reduce morbidity in head and neck cancer. Flaps are now present in 80% of patients with oral cavity cancer to cover anatomic, functional, and cosmetic needs. However, gaps in interdisciplinary innovation transfer from surgery to postoperative radiotherapy (poRT) remain challenging. We aimed to provide an interdisciplinary view of the challenges encountered by radiation oncologists in planning head and neck postoperative radiotherapy. Methods: A systematic and critical review was conducted to address areas of optimization in surgery and radiology that may be relevant to poRT. Results: Despite extensive surgical literature on flap techniques and salvage surgery, 13 retrospective series were identified, where flap outcomes were indirectly compared between surgery alone or poRT. These low-evidence studies suggest that radiotherapy accelerates flap atrophy, fibrosis, and osteoradionecrosis and deteriorates functional outcomes. Preliminary evidence suggests that tumor spread occurs at the flap-tissue junction rather than in the flaps. One prospective 15-patient study showed 31.3% vs. 39.2% flap volume reduction without or with poRT. In an international consensus, experts recognized the needs for optimized flap-sparing poRT against flap-related functional deterioration and bone damage. CT, MRI, and PET-CT modalities show potential for the delineation of the junction area between native tissues and flap for flap segmentation and to characterize flap-specific changes quantitatively and correlate them with patterns of relapse or complications. Conclusion: Flap management in poRT is insufficiently documented, but poRT seems to damage flaps. Current gaps in knowledge underscore the need for prospective flap assessment and interdisciplinary trials investigating flap morbidity minimization by flap-sparing poRT planning.

Indexed as

delineationfunctional outcomesguidelineshead and neck cancerradiotherapyreconstructive surgery/flaprelapsetarget volumes

Identifiers

PMID38665951
PMCPMC11043495
OpenAlexW4394723250

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.