SynthesisOtolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery2025
Mucosal Grafts and Flaps in Draf IIb and Draf III: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Synthesis 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.
- Extent of Sinus Surgery Is Associated With Disease Control in Biologic Treated Type 2 Dominant CRS.International forum of allergy & rhinology · 2026Article
- Draf III Procedure Using Multiple Pedicled Mucosal Flaps for Refractory Frontal Sinusitis: A Case Report.Cureus · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the impact of mucosal grafts and flaps on neo-ostium patency and clinical outcomes in patients undergoing Draf IIb or III frontal sinus drill-out procedures. DATA SOURCES: A systematic search was conducted across PubMed, Medline, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Web of Science databases in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. REVIEW
methodsFollowing PRISMA guidelines, consecutive studies were included, and a meta-analysis was performed. Study characteristics, patient demographics, surgical outcomes, and neo-ostium patency rates were extracted. Pooled relative risks (RRs) and mean differences (MDs) were estimated using random-effects models. Publication bias was evaluated via funnel plots and Egger's test.
resultsNine studies with 375 patients undergoing mucosal reconstruction were included, following 116 (30.9%) Draf IIb and 259 (69.1%) Draf III procedures. Four comparative studies were eligible for meta-analysis. Draf III was performed in 97.2% of cases (n = 318), with 165 (51.9%) patients in the flap group and 153 (48.1%) in the no-flap group. Mean follow-up was 41.3 ± 9.5 months. Mucosal flaps/grafts significantly improved neo-ostium patency (RR 1.087, 95% CI: 1.018-1.159, P = .011) and reduced loss of neo-ostium area (MD 19.52%, 95% CI: 9.97-29.06, P < .01). Clinical outcomes, including polyp scores and patient-reported measures, showed high heterogeneity, limiting synthesis.
conclusionMucosal reconstruction may enhance neo-ostium patency but could only be analyzed for Draf III. Variability in study design and outcome reporting remains a limitation. Standardized methodologies are essential to accurately assess the role of mucosal grafting in frontal sinus surgery.
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.