Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39104714›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in surgery2024

Facial nerve reconstruction for flaccid facial paralysis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Friedemann Zumbusch, Peter Schlattmann, Orlando Guntinas-Lichius

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Trends in Facial Reanimation Surgery: A Bibliometric Analysis.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2025
    Article
  6. 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

3 authors.

Friedemann ZumbuschDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Jena University Hospital, Jena, Germany.
Peter SchlattmannDepartment of Medical Statistics, Computer Sciences and Data Sciences, Jena University Hospital, Jena, Germany.
Orlando Guntinas-LichiusDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Jena University Hospital, Jena, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: To determine the functional outcome after facial nerve reconstruction surgery in patients with flaccid facial paralysis. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed on studies reporting outcomes after direct facial nerve suture (DFS), facial nerve interpositional graft suture (FIGS), hypoglossal-facial nerve suture (HFS), masseteric-facial nerve suture (MFS), and cross-face nerve suture (CFS). These studies were identified from PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science databases. Two independent reviewers performed two-stage screening and data extraction. A favorable result was defined as a final House-Brackmann grade I-III and is presented as a ratio of all patients in percentage. Pooled proportions were calculated using random-effects models. Results: From 4,932 screened records, 54 studies with 1,358 patients were included. A favorable result was achieved after DFS in 42.67% of the patients [confidence interval (CI): 26.05%-61.12%], after FIGS in 66.43% (CI: 55.99%-75.47%), after HFS in 63.89% (95% CI: 54.83%-72.05%), after MFS in 63.11% (CI: 38.53%-82.37%), and after CFS in 46.67% (CI: 24.09%-70.70%). There was no statistically significant difference between the techniques (Q = 6.56, degrees of freedom = 4, Conclusions: The established facial nerve reconstruction techniques including the single nerve cross-transfer techniques produce satisfactory results in most of the patients with permanent flaccid facial paralysis. An international consensus on standardized outcome measures would improve the comparability of facial reanimation techniques.

Indexed as

facial nervefacial reanimationhypoglossal nervemasseteric nervenerve suture

Identifiers

PMID39104714
PMCPMC11298393

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.