ReviewCureus2026
Modified Infrahyoid Myocutaneous Flap: A Systematic Review of Surgical Techniques.
Review in Cureus, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The infrahyoid myocutaneous flap (IHF) is used in reconstructive procedures for small- and medium-sized defects of the head and neck. The IHF is a versatile and technically straightforward reconstructive option; however, it has several limitations, including less reliable skin-paddle vascularity, size constraints, and a relatively short pedicle length. Accordingly, modifications aimed at improving its reliability and versatility have been actively explored. This systematic review aimed to identify available modifications of the IHF, with a focus on surgical technique. A Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA)-guided search from 1986 to 2025 identified 22 studies encompassing 728 patients. The modifications were categorized into five groups: incision modification, pedicle modification, superficial vein preservation, inclusion of the thyroid gland in the flap, and combination with a microvascular procedure. Among these groups, pedicle modification by periosteal release of the strap muscles from the hyoid was the most commonly used technique. These modifications can also be combined. The pooled estimates for overall flap loss with periosteal release of the strap muscles from the hyoid and vein preservation were 1.66% and 1.62%, respectively. The surgical techniques in each group are highlighted and discussed in this review. Overall, reconstructions using a modified IHF showed improved reliability and may broaden the clinical applications of this flap. However, conclusions regarding the ideal modification cannot be drawn because comparative studies are lacking.
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.