MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4367044517 · doi:10.1016/j.bjoms.2023.04.006

Safety and efficacy of adjunctive therapy in the treatment of odontogenic keratocyst: a systematic review

2023· review· en· W4367044517 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
R. Winters, M. Garip, J. Meeus, R. Coropciuc, C. Politis

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicOral and Maxillofacial Pathology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKeratocystMedicineOdontogenicDermatologyIntensive care medicineDentistryPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The odontogenic keratocyst (OKC) is a common cystic lesion in the jaw. Its management, however, is highly debated with no consensus on the best treatment option. Clinicians base their approach on treatment efficacy and associated morbidity. Management often consists of enucleation with peripheral ostectomy and adjunctive therapy to prevent recurrence. The aim of our systematic review was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of these different modalities. Embase, Medline, and Cochrane were searched according to the PRISMA guidelines for articles that presented non-syndromic patients with histopathologically confirmed OKC treated with 5-fluorouracil (5FU), Carnoy's solution (CS), or modified Carnoy's solution (MCS) as adjunctive therapy after enucleation and peripheral ostectomy. The outcomes of interest were safety (measured as adverse events) and efficacy (expressed as recurrence). Risk of bias was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Four studies were included and 62 patients were evaluated. The results show that recurrence occurred only in patients treated with MCS. Reported adverse events were mostly limited to paraesthesia that could be permanent (in the CS and MCS treatment groups) or transient (across all adjunctive therapies). With the prohibition of CS, both MCS and 5FU are promising replacement adjunctive therapies. From a safety and efficacy perspective we consider 5FU, which was associated with the lowest recurrence and fewest adverse events, to be the most viable option. More high-evidence prospective studies, such as randomised controlled trials, with a longer follow-up period are necessary to draw definite conclusions.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.843
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.253 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations25
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial SurgerySame topicOral and Maxillofacial PathologyFrench-language works237,207