Effects of dextran-40 on flap viability after modified radical mastectomy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Postoperative management of patients after modified radical mastectomy has evolved over the past decades. In the early postoperative period, wound complication rates were reported to be as high as 60%. Flap necrosis after modified radical mastectomy is a common problem encountered by surgeons. Various treatment strategies have been proposed in the literature but none have addressed the use of dextran-40. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether dextran-40 infusion improves skin flap viability after modified radical mastectomy. METHODS: Twenty-eight patients who underwent modified radical mastectomy were randomly assigned to receive dextran-40 or no dextran-40 intraoperatively after flap dissection. Patients were followed prospectively over a five-year period in a community hospital. The incidence of postmastectomy skin flap necrosis and prognosis of the necrotic area after dextran-40 infusion was observed. RESULTS: Flap necrosis was observed in five (17.8%) patients. Hypertension and diabetes mellitus were found to be risk factors for the development of flap necrosis (P<0.05). Flap thickness and tension on the flaps were found to be related to flap necrosis. Six of seven patients with flap perfusion problems (ecchymosis or necrosis) underwent dextran-40 treatment and healed without graft replacement. CONCLUSIONS: Dextran-40 treatment did not affect development of flap necrosis. However, if necrosis had already developed, the necrotic area of the skin flaps improved with dextran-40 treatment.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".