SynthesisQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation2025
Impact of rehabilitation with dental implants on the quality of life of patients undergoing maxillofacial reconstruction: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Oral Health-Related Quality of Life After Allogeneic Bone Marrow Transplant-A Cross-Sectional Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
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
purposeMaxillofacial reconstruction with dental implants in microvascular tissue flaps aims to improve mastication. However, the quality of life (QoL) impact of this intervention is yet to be determined. This systematic review assessed the QoL impact of maxillofacial reconstruction with implant-supported teeth compared to no dental rehabilitation, removable dentures, and obturator (modified denture). Additionally, we examined instruments applied to measure QoL in maxillofacial reconstruction.
methodsDatabases Ovid Medline and Embase, Scopus, Web of Science and Handle on QoL were searched. Cohort, case-control and randomized controlled trials (RCT) were narratively synthesized for QoL captured through validated instruments. Study methodological quality was assessed using Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 and Risk of Bias in Non-randomized studies of Exposure. Instruments underwent COSMIN content validity analysis.
resultsOf a total of 2735 studies screened, the three included studies (two cohort and one RCT) showed improved QoL with maxillofacial reconstruction compared to obturator and no dental rehabilitation. However, these studies have high risk of bias due to confounding. None of the instruments achieved a sufficient relevance rating for maxillofacial reconstruction, having been designed for other target populations and there is no evidence on their content validity for this population, but the EORTC QLQ30 H&N35 satisfied more COSMIN criteria than the UW-QOL and OHIP-14.
conclusionAlthough studies showed favourable QoL with maxillofacial reconstruction involving dental implants, these have high risk of bias and further studies are needed to establish the impact. Existing QoL instruments lack content validity and tailored instruments are needed for QoL evaluation in maxillofacial reconstruction.
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.