Vascular Basis of Intrinsic Muscle Flaps in the Hand
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Intrinsic hand muscles can occasionally be used as pedicled flaps for wound coverage or functioning transfer in hand trauma. The purpose of this study was to define the vascular supply of the individual intrinsic muscles of the hand for potential use of these muscles as muscle flaps. METHODS: In part A, 10 fresh cadavers were injected using a lead oxide-gelatin injection technique. The intrinsic muscles were meticulously dissected, removed, and radiographed. The number, type, and diameter of the vascular pedicles of each muscle and their distribution within the muscle were analyzed. The area of the vascular territory supplied by each source vessel was calculated. In part B, 10 embalmed cadavers were injected with red latex and a similar dissection protocol was followed. RESULTS: The 18 hand muscles each received an average of 3 +/- 1 vascular pedicles. The average diameter was 0.8 +/- 0.2 mm; the length and width of the area supplied by each pedicle was 2.2 +/- 0.4 cm and 1.0 +/- 0.2 cm, respectively. The vascular territories of the majority of hand muscles were aligned longitudinally along their long axes. Nine intrinsic hand muscles have been identified that can potentially be used as a muscle flap or musculocutaneous or musculo-osseous flap. CONCLUSIONS: The size and course of the vascular pedicles to the hand muscles are variable. This anatomical study provides an improved understanding of the vascular supply of the intrinsic muscles of the hand and provides further information to assist in the design of intrinsic hand muscle transfer.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".