MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414242814 · doi:10.1016/j.joms.2025.09.008

Rates and Determinants of Prosthodontic Rehabilitation After Segmental Jaw Surgery

2025· article· en· W4414242814 on OpenAlexafffund
Amal Idrissi Janati, Ameena Nizar Beema, Jordan Gigliotti, Nicholas Makhoul, Michel El‐Hakim, Nour Karra

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReconstructive Surgery and Microvascular Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal General Hospital
FundersCanadian Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons
KeywordsRehabilitationJaw FractureMandible (arthropod mouthpart)MEDLINECancer surgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Management of maxillofacial pathologies often requires ablative surgeries of the jaw which may include the tooth-bearing segment resulting in loss of oral function. Advances in maxillomandibular reconstruction with vascularized free flaps (VFFs) and dental implants have enabled prosthodontic rehabilitation (PR) in most patients. However, the impact of these advancements on rates and barriers of PR remains unclear. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to estimate the rate of PR and identify risk factors associated with failure to achieve PR. STUDY DESIGN, SETTING, SAMPLE: This 7-year retrospective cohort study was conducted at the Montreal General Hospital and included patients aged ≥15 years who underwent vascularized free flap reconstruction following jaw segmental resection between 2015 and 2021. PREDICTOR VARIABLE: Predictor variables included age, sex, smoking, clinical diagnosis, adjuvant radiotherapy, flap type, and anterior tooth loss. MAIN OUTCOME VARIABLE(S): The primary outcome is time to PR and secondary outcomes were PR status (not performed vs performed) and PR type (conventional vs implant-supported) respectively. COVARIATES: NA. ANALYSES: Descriptive statistics, comparison tests, Kaplan-Meier analysis, and univariate and multivariate Cox and logistic regression analyses were conducted (P < .05). RESULTS: The study included 184 subjects with a mean age of 58 years (SD = 17), and 52% (n = 95) were men. The median follow-up was 20 months (interquartile range = 32). Malignancy was the most common diagnosis leading to surgery (n = 106; 58%), followed by benign tumors (n = 46; 25%). Cumulative proportion of PR was 41% (n = 76), including 19.5% (n = 36) of implant-supported prostheses. Median time to start PR was 44 months (95% CI: 30 to 78) and was significantly delayed in men, ever smokers, cancer patients, and those who received radiotherapy. In multivariate analysis, radiotherapy was the main predictor of failure to receive PR overall (P = .014) and implant-supported PR specifically (P = .025). CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: Many patients with dental morbidity after segmental jaw surgery, especially cancer patients requiring radiotherapy, did not receive PR, and even fewer received implant-supported prostheses, highlighting the need for preradiotherapy solutions.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Oral and Maxillofacial SurgerySame topicReconstructive Surgery and Microvascular TechniquesFrench-language works237,207