SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2026
Summary of the best evidence for the prevention and management of postoperative tracheostomy complications in laryngeal cancer patients.
Synthesis in Frontiers in oncology, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: This study aimed to identify, evaluate, and synthesize the best available evidence for the prevention and management of postoperative tracheostomy complications in patients with laryngeal cancer. Methods: The evidence-based question was structured using the PIPOST framework. Systematic searches were conducted up to February 22, 2026, across multiple databases and resources, including BMJ Best Practice, UpToDate, the International Guideline Library, Cochrane Library, PubMed, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and Wanfang Data. The search targeted various evidence types such as clinical decisions, guidelines, expert consensuses, evidence summaries, systematic reviews, and randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Literature screening, quality assessment, data extraction, and evidence synthesis were performed independently by two researchers, integrating professional judgment. Results: A total of 24 publications were included, comprising 5 guidelines, 8 evidence summaries, 6 expert consensus papers, 2 clinical decisions, 1 systematic review, and 2 RCTs. From these, 48 best practice recommendations were summarized and categorized into five key themes: multidisciplinary team and systematic management, artificial airway maintenance and safety, prevention and management of complications, active rehabilitation and dysphagia management, and nutritional support and prevention of malnutrition. Discussion: This work provides a comprehensive and practical summary of the best current evidence. Healthcare professionals are recommended to apply these findings in clinical practice, tailored to specific contexts and patient preferences, in order to develop systematized, proactive, and function-oriented care protocols, which are crucial for reducing complication rates and improving patient outcomes. Systematic Review Registration: http://ebn.nursing.fudan.edu.cn/home, identifier ES20258917.
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.