ArticleWorld journal of otorhinolaryngology - head and neck surgery2025
Outcomes in Orbit-Sparing Versus Orbit-Sacrificing Surgery for Sinonasal Malignancies With Orbital Involvement: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Article in World journal of otorhinolaryngology - head and neck surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Sinonasal Mucosal Epithelioid Melanoma with Rapid Skull-Base and Orbital Progression.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Sinonasal malignancies with orbital involvement may be managed with orbit-sacrificing or orbit-preserving surgical approaches, with a recent shift towards orbital preservation to reduce postoperative morbidity while maintaining oncological success. The current clinical data on the most optimal approach for managing such locally advanced tumours remains inconclusive. Methods: PubMed, Embase, and SCOPUS were searched from inception to 12 June 2024 for longitudinal studies investigating oncological and functional outcomes in sinonasal malignancies with orbital involvement managed with orbit-sacrificing vs. orbit-preserving surgery. Two independent authors selected relevant articles, extracted data, assessed bias using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and evaluated quality of evidence following the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations framework. Random-effects meta-analysis was performed to synthesise pooled oncological outcomes, while descriptive reviews were performed for functional outcomes. Results: This systematic review and meta-analysis of 12 studies and 758 participants found that the 5-year overall survival rate of patients managed with orbit-preserving surgery (55%, 95% CI: 0.32-0.76) was comparable to that in patients managed with orbit-sacrificing surgery (53%, 95% CI: 0.34-0.70). The 5-year recurrence-free survival rate was significantly higher in patients managed with orbit-preserving surgical intervention (64%, 95% CI: 0.44-0.80), compared to those with orbit-sacrificing surgery (48%, 95% CI: 0.13-0.84). Descriptive review showed good functional outcomes in patients managed with orbit-preserving surgery. Conclusion: Orbit-preserving surgery in selected cases of sinonasal malignancies with orbital involvement is oncologically safe and can allow for the maintenance of a functionally useful eye. Greater number of large-scale, robust studies are required to further evaluate the outcomes in tumours with different characteristics.
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.