Analysis of changes in bone mineral density and cortical bone thickness after reconstruction of the mandible with fibula, is condyle preservation a critical influence factor?

Yihui Yang, Shang Xie, Yifan Kang, Xiangyu Li, Huimin Chen, Xiaofeng Shan, Zhigang Cai

Abstract read

In one paragraph

Article in Clinical oral investigations, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

0citing papers in PubMed

–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

7 authors.

Yihui Yang *Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, National Center of Stomatology & National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases & National Engineering Research Center of Oral Biomaterials and Digital Medical Devices & Beijing Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology & NHC Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology & NMPA Key Laboratory for Dental Materials, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology, No.22, Zhongguancun South Avenue, Haidian District, Beijing, 100081, PR China.

Shang Xie *Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, National Center of Stomatology & National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases & National Engineering Research Center of Oral Biomaterials and Digital Medical Devices & Beijing Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology & NHC Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology & NMPA Key Laboratory for Dental Materials, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology, No.22, Zhongguancun South Avenue, Haidian District, Beijing, 100081, PR China.

Yifan KangDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, National Center of Stomatology & National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases & National Engineering Research Center of Oral Biomaterials and Digital Medical Devices & Beijing Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology & NHC Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology & NMPA Key Laboratory for Dental Materials, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology, No.22, Zhongguancun South Avenue, Haidian District, Beijing, 100081, PR China.

Xiangyu LiDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, National Center of Stomatology & National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases & National Engineering Research Center of Oral Biomaterials and Digital Medical Devices & Beijing Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology & NHC Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology & NMPA Key Laboratory for Dental Materials, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology, No.22, Zhongguancun South Avenue, Haidian District, Beijing, 100081, PR China.

Huimin ChenDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, National Center of Stomatology & National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases & National Engineering Research Center of Oral Biomaterials and Digital Medical Devices & Beijing Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology & NHC Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology & NMPA Key Laboratory for Dental Materials, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology, No.22, Zhongguancun South Avenue, Haidian District, Beijing, 100081, PR China. gone226@163.com.

Xiaofeng ShanDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, National Center of Stomatology & National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases & National Engineering Research Center of Oral Biomaterials and Digital Medical Devices & Beijing Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology & NHC Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology & NMPA Key Laboratory for Dental Materials, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology, No.22, Zhongguancun South Avenue, Haidian District, Beijing, 100081, PR China. bdkqsxf@163.com.

Zhigang CaiDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, National Center of Stomatology & National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases & National Engineering Research Center of Oral Biomaterials and Digital Medical Devices & Beijing Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology & NHC Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology & NMPA Key Laboratory for Dental Materials, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology, No.22, Zhongguancun South Avenue, Haidian District, Beijing, 100081, PR China.

Funding

Capital Funds for Health Improvement and Research 2024-2-4104

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThis study aimed to investigate the features of bone mineral density (BMD) and cortical bone thickness in grafted fibula. MATERIALS AND

methodsEighty-six patients who underwent mandibular reconstruction using vascularized fibula flaps were enrolled, all of whom were followed up at 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery. The patients were grouped according to whether the condyle was preserved. BMD and cortical bone thickness were also measured.

resultsCondyle-preserved group consisted of 65 patients and condyle-unpreserved group consisted of 21 patients. There was a significant correlation between thickness and BMD, which was significantly correlated with follow-up time. One year after surgery, the BMD of the condyle-preserved group decreased from 1029.61 ± 156.01 mg/cm

conclusionBMD and thickness showed a decreasing trend over time. Preserving the condyle can slow bone resorption of the fibula. Regarding implant restoration, we recommend doctors to perform the treatment within 6-12 months after surgery in order to effectively manage bone resorption. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Our study found that condylar preservation can decrease the absorption rate of BMD and cortical bone thickness, helping doctors make better clinical decisions. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ChiCTR2300069661 (March 22, 2023).

Indexed as

Bone DensityCortical BoneFibulaMandibular CondyleMandibular ReconstructionAdultAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedSurgical FlapsTreatment OutcomeBone densityBone resorptionDental implantationMandible reconstructionQuantitative computed tomographyVascularized fibula free flap

Identifiers

PMID39482400

DOI10.1007/s00784-024-06027-0

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata

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.