The transverse upper gracilis flap: Efficiencies and design tips
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The transverse upper gracilis free flap is a well-described option for breast reconstruction. The technique is a secondary choice for autologous breast reconstruction because the abdomen remains the primary donor site for breast reconstruction. However, in appropriately selected patients, the authors believe that the transverse upper gracilis flap remains a reliable flap for breast reconstruction. Its consistent anatomy, potentially reasonable donor site scar, limited functional morbidity and simultaneous two-team surgical approach make this flap a viable option for many patients. The technique, however, is not without drawbacks - known numbness of the medial thigh and the potential for chronic lymphedema of the lower leg, contour deformities of the medial thigh, and widening of the medial thigh scar need to be considered. The current article presents a harvest technique that is reliable, rapid and addresses each of the above-mentioned limitations with specific changes in the traditional technique. The article provides video documentation of the modified harvest technique using only monopolar cautery for the dissection.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it