ArticleCureus2025
Outcomes of Free Flap Surgery in Head and Neck Cancer Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease: A Single-Institution Retrospective Study of 61 Cases.
Article in Cureus, 2025. 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction The number of head and neck cancer patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) is increasing. Although free flap reconstruction has become more feasible with advances in renal replacement therapy, perioperative risks in CKD remain uncertain. Prior reports are limited and inconclusive. We evaluated free flap outcomes in CKD patients undergoing head and neck reconstruction. Materials and methods We performed a single-institution retrospective analysis of 61 patients with CKD, operationalized by preoperative estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) within the presurgical window (<60 mL/min/1.73 m²), who underwent free flap reconstruction (2011-2022). The primary outcome was flap complications (postoperative thrombosis requiring thrombectomy or flap necrosis). Failure cases underwent histopathologic review of anastomosed vessels. A prespecified descriptive comparison contrasted flap events by diabetes mellitus (DM) status. Statistical analysis used Fisher's exact test; owing to only five events, no multivariable models were fitted. Postoperative continuous hemodiafiltration (CHDF) use was recorded. Results The most common eGFR category was G3a (65.1%), followed by G3b, G5, and G4. Flap complications occurred in 5/61 (8.2%) patients: necrosis (3/61; 4.9%) and thrombosis salvaged by thrombectomy (2/61; 3.3%). All events arose in G3a; no events were seen in G3b-G5 or among CHDF cases. Histopathology showed severe occlusive change in one necrosis case (~80% luminal stenosis), while other failures had at most mild intimal thickening; two failures occurred without diabetes mellitus (DM)/cardiovascular disease or evident vascular pathology. DM was present in 14/61 (23%) patients; event proportion was 14.3% with DM vs. 6.4% without DM (Fisher p = 0.32), a non-significant difference consistent in direction with prior reports. Discussion Events were infrequent and clustered in G3a; the absence of events in higher categories is not interpretable, given very small subgroup sizes and limited power. Vascular pathology among failures was heterogeneous, indicating that overt vasculopathy or glycemic status alone does not fully explain failure. Careful perioperative management may support flap viability, but causal inference is unwarranted. Conclusion Free flap reconstruction appears feasible in selected CKD patients with optimized perioperative care; however, findings are hypothesis-generating and require confirmation in larger controlled cohorts with standardized operative reporting and adjustment for confounding.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.