ArticleCureus2025
Reconstruction of Oromandibular Defects With Radial Forearm Free Flaps and Fibular Free Flaps: One-Year Experience From Hospital Selayang and the National Cancer Institute, Malaysia.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Sensory Abnormalities and Pain in the Donor Sites of Radial Forearm and Fibula Free Flaps-A Systematic Review.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Oromandibular defects are complex to reconstruct, often requiring free tissue transfer. Radial forearm free flaps (RFFFs) and vascularized fibular free flaps (VFFFs) are among the most established techniques. This study aimed to evaluate short-term outcomes, complications, and donor-site morbidity of RFFFs and VFFFs in oromandibular reconstruction over a one-year period at Hospital Selayang and the National Cancer Institute, Malaysia. Methodology A retrospective review was conducted of patients who underwent oromandibular reconstruction with RFFFs or VFFFs between July 2022 and July 2023. Outcomes assessed included flap survival, donor-site morbidity, and patient satisfaction. Results A total of 16 patients were included, of whom 10 received an RFFF and six received a VFFF. All RFFF cases achieved 100% early flap survival, while one VFFF case (13%) failed and required removal. Donor-site morbidity in the RFFF group included superficial radial nerve sensory deficits (70%), cold intolerance (40%), and dissatisfaction with scarring (40%). In the VFFF group, no foot drop, nerve injury, or ankle instability occurred; however, leg swelling (40%) and cold intolerance (40%) were reported. Conclusions Both RFFF and VFFF are effective for oromandibular reconstruction. RFFF is more suitable for soft tissue defects, while VFFF remains the preferred option for osseous reconstruction. To maximize outcomes, it is necessary to individually select flaps based on defect characteristics and patient factors.
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.