ReviewSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2026
Oral rehabilitation of patients with cancer: challenges following surgical resection.
Review in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo discuss the main challenges in oral rehabilitation of patients with oral cancer after surgical resection and to present viable strategies to overcome these limitations.
methodsA comprehensive literature search was conducted and the principal clinically relevant challenges identified were reduced bone height, flap volume, glossectomy, limited mouth opening, velopharyngeal dysfunction, and xerostomia.
resultsMaxillary palatal ramp prostheses, mandibular guidance prostheses, and twin occlusion prostheses are indicated for patients without reconstruction grafting who present reduced bone height and mandibular deviation. In cases of extensive hard and soft tissue loss, type 3 fixed prostheses represent an appropriate option. Patients undergoing glossectomy may benefit from palatal or lingual augmentation and mandibular obturator prostheses. Sectional and flexible prostheses are suitable for individuals with restricted mouth opening. Maxillary or pharyngeal obturator prostheses are recommended for velopharyngeal dysfunction, while prostheses incorporating salivary reservoirs may assist patients with xerostomia.
conclusionOncologic treatment may result in multiple anatomical and functional oral alterations. Clinicians must be familiar with available prosthetic rehabilitation options to adequately manage these conditions. A multidisciplinary approach is essential to achieve effective and integrated care. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Presents practical, evidence-based alternatives to optimize function, comfort, and quality of life in patients with complex oral conditions.
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.