ArticleOtolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery2025
Outcomes and Complications of 2-Stage Versus 3-Stage Paramedian Forehead Flaps.
Article in Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Staged Paramedian Forehead Flap Reconstruction of a Large Oncologic Nasal Defect: A Case Report.Cureus · 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aims to explore outcomes among 2-stage paramedian forehead flaps (PFFs), 3-stage PFFs, and PFFs undergoing accelerated pedicle takedown. STUDY
designA retrospective review.
settingA tertiary care institution.
methodsPatients who underwent PFFs for nasal defects between 2017 and 2022 were identified. Demographic, clinical, and surgical characteristics were compared among groups. Surgical and cosmetic outcomes and revision procedures were evaluated.
resultsAmong 52 patients analyzed, 39 underwent 2-stage PFFs, and 13 underwent 3-stage PFFs. There were no significant differences in demographics, comorbidities, or surgical risk factors between groups. Three-stage PFF patients were more likely to have a cartilaginous defect. Postoperative dyspigmentation was seen more frequently in the 3-stage group; otherwise, there were no significant differences in outcomes. In a subanalysis of 29 patients requiring cartilage grafting, dyspigmentation was again seen more commonly in the 3-stage group; outcomes otherwise did not favor either group. Within the 2-stage group, 7 patients underwent accelerated pedicle takedown (≤21 days). No failures were seen with accelerated takedown, including among those who also received cartilage grafting. Overall, accelerated takedown was not associated with poorer surgical or cosmetic outcomes or an increased revision rate compared to standard takedown. Logistic regression did not identify any independent predictors of complication.
conclusionBoth 2- and 3-stage PFFs are effective tools in midface reconstruction, including when cartilage grafting is required. With 2-stage PFF, accelerated pedicle takedown is not associated with increased complications in appropriately selected 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.