ArticleFrontiers in oncology2024
Antiresorptive agents enhance ossification of free flap reconstructions of the mandible: a radiological retrospective cohort study.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of antiresorptive agents on the ossification of reconstructed mandibles by free bone grafts for the first time. Methods: A total of 38 reconstructions of the jaw were retrospectively evaluated for ossification between bone segments by two raters based on postoperative panoramic radiographs. The study group (n = 13) had segmental resection of the mandible and free bone flap reconstruction due to medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ). The control group (noMRONJ, n = 25) comprised segmental mandibular resections and free bone flap reconstructions due to tumors, chronic osteomyelitis, or trauma without any radiation. Ossification time and influencing factors were evaluated. Results: Both duration of surgery (346 ± 90 min. vs. 498 ± 124 min.; p < 0.001) and hospitalization (8.7 ± 2.8 days vs. 13.4 ± 5.3 days, p = 0.006) were shorter in the MRONJ group compared to the noMRONJ group. Ossification after mandibular reconstruction was significantly faster in the MRONJ study group [224 days, interquartile range (IQR) 175-287] compared to the control group (288 days, IQR 194-445; p < 0.001). Moreover, good initial contact between the segments resulted in faster ossification (p < 0.001) in the MRONJ group. Ossification rate between original and grafted bone or between grafted bone segments only did not differ in both the study and control groups (MRONJ, p = 0.705 vs. control, p = 0.292). The type of antiresorptive agent did not show any significance for ossification. The rate of wound healing disturbances did also not differ between the study and control groups (p = 0.69). Conclusion: Advanced MRONJ (stage 3) can be resected and reconstructed safely with free microvascular bone flaps. Antiresorptive agents enhance the ossification of the bone segments. Optimal initial contact of the bone segments accelerates bone healing. Surgery and hospitalization are markedly shortened in this vulnerable group of MRONJ patients compared to oncologic patients.
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.