ArticleCancers2026
Computer-Assisted Intraoperative Navigation in Pediatric Head and Neck Surgical Oncology: A Single-Center Case Series and Scoping Review of the Literature.
Article in Cancers, 2026. 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.
- Electromagnetic Surgical Navigation for Accurate Pediatric Tumor Localization: A Preclinical Animal Cadaver Study.Cancers · 2026Article
- [Current status and prospects of family financial toxicity in childhood malignancies].Zhongguo dang dai er ke za zhi = Chinese journal of contemporary pediatrics · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAs pediatric head and neck cancer (pHNC) incidence increases, the development of new surgical oncology techniques to reduce morbidity are essential. Intraoperative navigation (iNav) represents the most translatable technology among both the model-comparative and integrative surgical navigation technologies to optimize surgical outcomes.
methodsA scoping review of the literature was performed according to PRISMA guidelines from 1970 to present (February 2025), investigating the use of iNav in cases of pHNC. Patient case details and authors' perception of iNav's utility were analyzed. A single-center retrospective case series review (September 2022 to September 2025) of the senior authors' experience employing iNav in pHNC cases was also performed.
resultsThe scoping review identified twenty-seven cases of pHNC from sixteen studies that both utilized iNav and met the inclusion criteria. Many of the authors commented favorably on the utility of iNav technology, while concurrently agreeing upon its limitations. The case series review identified five cases of pHNC that met the inclusion criteria. This small case series revealed a 100% R0 resection rate with the use of iNav in four pHNC resections. The fifth case used iNav for biopsy site selection.
conclusionsThe results of our scoping review as well as our institutional experience with this technology demonstrate its utility in guiding surgical approach, confirming depth of resection, and navigating marginal assessment. This study was limited by incidental and incomplete reporting of iNav's clinical application to pHNC; several extensive institutional reports had to be excluded due to insufficiently detailed data linkage. Our review builds upon the existing pediatric surgical literature, anchoring the evidentiary justification for the application of iNav to pediatric head and neck 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.