MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2991032245 · doi:10.1111/cid.12870

Immediate dental implants in fibula free flaps to reconstruct the mandible: A pilot study of the short‐term effects on radiotherapy for patients with head and neck cancer

2019· article· en· W2991032245 on OpenAlex
María L. Sandoval, Evan B. Rosen, Allen J. Robert, Jonas A. Nelson, Evan Matros, Daphna Y. Gelblum

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReconstructive Surgery and Microvascular Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Cancer InstituteNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsMedicineFibulaTrismusOsteoradionecrosisRadiation therapyHead and neck cancerFree flapSurgeryMandible (arthropod mouthpart)Dental implantRetrospective cohort studyIncidence (geometry)CancerMaxillaDentistryImplantTibiaInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: The current pilot study aims to report short-term experience as it relates to acute radiotherapy treatment outcomes comparing patients with immediate dental implants in fibula free flap reconstructions to a historical cohort of patients with fibula free flap reconstructions without dental implants. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective review of patients who underwent segmental mandibulectomy, reconstruction with fibula free flaps, and adjuvant radiotherapy with (n = 10) and without immediate dental implants (n = 10) at a tertiary cancer center from 2015 to 2018 was performed (IRB #17-271). Incidence of postoperative complications, time to initiation of radiation therapy, development of acute toxicity, and patient reported outcome data were recorded. The radiation plans were evaluated to identify the mean and maximum doses received by the mandible and oral cavity as well as the locations of radiation global hot spots. RESULTS: There was a similar number of postoperative complications in both cohorts, with three events in the case group and two events in the control group. Patients with dental implants reported less trismus than control patients. Evaluation of the radiation treatment plans revealed similar median radiation global hot spots in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: The current study suggests that the presence of dental implants does not increase the risk of complications following surgery or during radiation treatment. Implants do not alter radiation dosimetry but do appear to positively impact early patient quality of life. Although longer follow-up is needed, based on this preliminary experience, cancer patients should be offered this type of reconstruction without fear of impacting radiation timing or delivery.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.342

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.050
GPT teacher head0.411
Teacher spread0.361 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it