ArticleOral and maxillofacial surgery2026
Mandibular reconstruction with fibula free flap: a comparative analysis of clinical outcomes of CAD/CAM-assisted surgery versus model-assisted conventional technique.
Article in Oral and maxillofacial surgery, 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
objectivesThe aim of this study was to compare clinical and patient-reported outcomes of mandibular reconstruction with fibula free flap (FFF) performed using model-assisted conventional technique versus computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) with virtual surgical planning (VSP). MATERIALS AND
methodsPatients who underwent microvascular mandibular reconstruction with FFF between January 2016 and December 2023 were retrospectively reviewed. Inclusion criteria were age ≥ 18 years, segmental mandibular resection, and a minimum follow-up of 12 months. Patients were divided into two groups: model-assisted conventional reconstruction (Group A) and CAD/CAM-assisted reconstruction with VSP (Group B). Demographic, pathological, and surgical variables were collected. Morphological and functional outcomes were assessed using validated instruments including the Katsuragi Scale, FACE-Q Aesthetics, EORTC QLQ-H&N43, MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory (MDADI), and Speech Handicap Index (SHI).
resultsThirty-two patients were included (11 in Group A, 21 in Group B). CAD/CAM-assisted reconstruction showed significantly better aesthetic outcomes according to both patient and surgeon evaluations with Katsuragi Scale (p = 0.0001). FACE-Q Satisfaction with Surgical Outcome scores were significantly higher in Group B (p = 0.02). Patients treated with CAD/CAM also reported significantly fewer self-reported speech-related disturbances according to the SHI (p = 0.01). Other functional measures showed favourable trends for CAD/CAM reconstruction but did not reach statistical significance.
conclusionsCAD/CAM-assisted reconstruction was associated with improved aesthetic outcomes, greater patient satisfaction, and better speech-related function compared with conventional techniques. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Digital surgical planning may improve the precision and predictability of mandibular reconstruction and was associated with better patient-reported outcomes, particularly in speech-related 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.