ArticleBioinformation2026
Pectoralis major myocutaneous versus pectoralis major myofascial flap for type III and type IV tongue defects reconstruction in patients operated for squamous cell carcinoma: A protocol.
Article in Bioinformation, 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
Reconstruction following extensive resection of tongue squamous cell carcinoma remains challenging because the optimal pedicled flap for achieving superior functional recovery and aesthetic outcomes is still uncertain. Therefore, it is of interest to compare pectoralis major myocutaneous (PMMC) and pectoralis major myofascial (PMMF) flaps for reconstruction of Type III and Type IV tongue defects in patients undergoing surgical treatment for squamous cell carcinoma. Twenty-four eligible patients will be randomly allocated into two groups, and post-operative outcomes including flap-related complications, tongue shape, swallowing, speech and tongue mobility will be evaluated at 1 week, 1 month and 3 months using standardized clinical assessment scales. Functional and aesthetic outcomes between the two reconstruction techniques will be analyzed using appropriate statistical methods to determine differences in clinical performance and patient rehabilitation. Thus, data shows to generate evidence that supports selection of the most effective pedicled flap for tongue reconstruction and improves functional recovery, quality of life and clinical decision-making in resource-constrained settings.
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.