Pedicled Omental Flaps as an Adjunct in the Closure of Complex Spinal Wounds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Brief Study Design. A retrospective clinical study. Objective. To evaluate the safety and efficacy of using an omental flap in complex spine reconstruction in patients at high-risk for wound dehiscence. Summary of Background Data. Postoperative wound dehiscence represents a major cause of morbidity in patients undergoing instrumented spinal reconstruction. A variety of approaches for the prevention and treatment of this problem have been previously described in the literature; however, the use of omental flaps has received little attention. Methods. In this retrospective analysis, 5 patients were studied both clinically and radiographically. The study population included 4 women and 1 man, with a mean age of 49 years (range, 31–67 years). All patients underwent an omental flap procedure at the time of spinal reconstruction because of significant soft tissue defects or active spinal infection. Mean clinicoradiographic follow-up was 53 months (range, 36–115 months). Results. At the time of follow-up, all patients had well-healed surgical wounds with an acceptable structural and esthetic result. One patient in the study group experienced minor supra-fascial wound dehiscence. In terms of spinal outcome, all patients achieved successful bony arthrodesis; 1 patient, however, developed symptomatic adjacent segment degeneration and was treated by extension of the fusion construct. Conclusion. In patients undergoing thoracolumbar surgery who are at high risk of spinal wound dehiscence, closure using a pedicled omental flap is a viable procedure that may limit the risk of dehiscence and improve outcome. Postoperative wound dehiscence represents a major cause of morbidity in patients undergoing instrumented spinal reconstruction. A variety of approaches for the prevention and treatment of this problem have been previously described in the literature. The authors report the largest experience to date using omental flaps in complex spinal reconstruction.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 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".