MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Microvascular Free Tissue Transfer of the Trapezius Flap in 20 Dogs and a Wallaby

2012· article· en· W1553114100 on OpenAlexaff
Lindsey Kurach, Mark E. H. Smith, J. D. Fowler

Bibliographic record

VenueVeterinary Surgery · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReconstructive Surgery and Microvascular Techniques
Canadian institutionsGuardian Chemicals (Canada)Canadian VIGOUR Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSurgeryFree flapTrapezius muscleSoft tissueOsteomyelitis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To determine the feasibility, complications, and clinical outcome of consecutive free trapezius flap transfers in 20 dogs and a wallaby. STUDY DESIGN: Case series. ANIMALS: Dogs (n = 20) and 1 wallaby METHODS: Medical records of 20 dogs and 1 wallaby that had free trapezius flap transfers were evaluated retrospectively for indications, date of transfer, site of flap relocation, flap composition (myocutaneous, muscular, myoosseus), recipient artery and veins, flap ischemia times, surgery time, antithrombotic strategies used, intra- and postoperative complications related to the flap, hospitalization, in hospital duration after flap transfer, and outcome. RESULTS: Free flap transfers (16 muscle, 4 myocutaneous, 1 myoosseus) were used to treat traumatic soft tissue loss (13), neoplasm excision (2), osteomyelitis (4), and soft palate reconstruction (2); all flaps survived. Anti-thrombotic therapy was used in all cases although strategies varied. Postoperative complications were infrequent, generally of low severity, and primarily included donor site seroma formation and infection. CONCLUSIONS: Free trapezius flap was successfully used in 21 consecutive cases for a wide variety of reconstructive techniques with good, functional long-term outcome.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.159
Threshold uncertainty score0.546

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.227 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations2
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVeterinary SurgerySame topicReconstructive Surgery and Microvascular TechniquesFrench-language works237,207