ReviewOral and maxillofacial surgery2026
Soft tissue augmentation options for volume replacement following parotidectomy: A review of the literature.
Review in Oral and maxillofacial surgery, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSalivary gland tumors primarily arise in the parotid gland with surgery representing the cornerstone of treatment. Parotidectomies often lead to a soft tissue deficit that may benefit from reconstruction to reduce incidence of Frey's syndrome, improve aesthetic outcomes, and allow for appropriate postoperative therapies. Several options exist including avascular tissue transfer, locoregional tissue flaps, and microvascular free flaps.
methodsThis paper is a literature review exploring the efficacy of the various reconstructive options, and includes randomized control trials, prospective studies, and retrospective studies from 1999 to 2024.
resultsThe literature demonstrates that any reconstructive option is superior to no reconstruction in reducing the risk of FS and in improving cosmetic outcomes without increasing the risk of postoperative complications including hematomas and sialoceles.
conclusionsWhile literature demonstrates that reconstruction is beneficial in parotidectomies, the existing literature does not provide an adequate comparison of options to guide surgeons in making an informed choice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41729338What 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.