ArticleCureus2025
Revisiting the Diversity of Nasolabial Flaps in Reconstructive Surgery.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe nasolabial flap is a regional flap with vascularity based on the facial artery inferiorly and the angular artery superiorly. Depending on the area to be covered, it can be islanded or pedicled and performed in a single-stage or two-stage procedure. The tissue laxity in this area provides a wider arc of rotation, and the good color match adds to the other advantages of this flap. Generally, it is used to cover nasal, lip, and alveolar defects. It is especially useful in patients with multiple comorbidities, in whom major flaps cannot be planned. METHODOLOGY: This is a retrospective descriptive study of 19 patients who underwent closure of various facial and intraoral defects with nasolabial flaps and were admitted to a tertiary care hospital between January 2019 and March 2024. The various parameters analyzed were the age, gender, comorbidities, size of defect, duration of hospital stay, wound dehiscence, flap necrosis, and the type of nasolabial flap that was used.
resultsIn patients in whom the facial defects were small and when free flaps were not possible due to poor general conditions and comorbidities, nasolabial flaps were used. Wound healing was good with no flap necrosis. Nasolabial flaps were used for covering defects over the dorsum, root, and ala of the nose, tongue, hard palate, buccal mucosa, glabella, upper and lower lip, and angle of the mouth.
conclusionNasolabial flaps are highly robust and useful in patients with comorbidities and for smaller defects. They provide good aesthetic and functional outcomes in all 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.