ArticleFrontiers in oncology2026
Clinical outcomes of the tunnelized-facial artery myomucosal island flaps in the oral cavity and comparison with cutaneous flaps in an animal model.
Article 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study aims to evaluate the clinical efficacy of tunnelized-facial artery myomucosal island flaps (t-FAMMIF) in reconstructing mucosal defects following oral cancer surgery and compare the characteristics between mucosal and cutaneous flaps. Methods: A total of 23 patients who underwent t-FAMMIF reconstruction were enrolled and monitored for functional recovery and complication resolution. Using propensity score matching, 20 cases were paired with a cohort of patients receiving cutaneous flaps (n=20 per group). Sensory function was assessed using the Semmes-Weinstein monofilament test and two-point discrimination tests, while motor function was evaluated with the Water Swallowing Test. Facial nerve function was assessed by House-Brackmann grading scale, wireless surface electromyography, and FaceGram software. Mouth opening was measured by maximum inter-incisal opening. Additionally, to explore the mechanisms underlying differential functional recovery, mucosal and cutaneous flaps were compared in a beagle dog model, with subsequent histological analysis. Results: Compared to the cutaneous flap group, the t-FAMMIF group exhibited superior aesthetic and sensory outcomes, with facial nerve dysfunction and trismus largely resolved by 6 months. Histological analysis in the animal model revealed that mucosal flaps preserved minor salivary glands and exhibited significantly reduced scar formation, providing a tissue-level explanation for the enhanced sensory recovery observed clinically. Conclusion: T-FAMMIF is an effective option for reconstructing small to moderate mucosal defects. Compared to cutaneous flaps, it provides advantages including superior aesthetic results, enhanced sensory recovery, minimized scarring, and preservation of salivary gland function.
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.