ArticleRambam Maimonides medical journal2024
Local Flap Reconstructions in Oral Cavity Defects: An Insight from 104 Cases.
Article in Rambam Maimonides medical journal, 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.
- Response to Letter to the Editor.Rambam Maimonides medical journal · 2025Article
- Optimizing Recovery in Oral Flap Surgeries: The Undervalued Role of Physiotherapy.Rambam Maimonides medical journal · 2025Article
- Modified Infrahyoid Myocutaneous Flap by Preserving Muscular Attachments to the Hyoid Bone - A Retrospective Study.Annals of maxillofacial surgeryArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundResection of oral cavity carcinoma often leads to complex defects causing functional and aesthetic morbidity. Providing optimum reconstruction with free flaps becomes challenging in a high-volume center setting with constrained resources. Hence, understanding the local flap technique for reconstructing oral cancer defects is prudent. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis study is a retrospective analysis of prospectively operated cases of oral cavity resections which were subsequently reconstructed using local flaps from 2019 to 2022. Patients who underwent reconstruction with either melolabial flap, islanded facial artery myomucosal (FAMM) flap, submental flap, supraclavicular artery island flap, infrahyoid flap, or platysma myocutaneous flap (PMF) were included in this analysis. Eligible patients were followed up to evaluate functional outcomes like oral feeding and to analyze the Performance Status Scale for Head and Neck Cancer.
resultsThe study included 104 patients. The tongue was the most common subsite, resulting in most hemiglossectomy defects, which were reconstructed using the melolabial flap procedure. Buccal mucosa defects in our series were reconstructed using the supraclavicular flap, whereas the submental flap procedure was the choice for lower lip-commissure defects. Complications such as partial and total flap loss, deep neck infection, and donor site complications like infection and gaping, oral cutaneous fistula, parotid fistula, and seroma were analyzed; the supraclavicular flap presented with a majority of complications.
conclusionLocal flaps are an alternative to free flap reconstruction in select cases with optimum functional outcomes and minimal donor site morbidity. This article comprehensively reviews the surgical steps for various local flap procedures in oral cancer defects.
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.