MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2007858189 · doi:10.1097/prs.0b013e3181d4fdff

Atrophy among Mucosa-Only versus Muscular Mucosa Superiorly Based Pharyngeal Flaps: A Pilot Animal Study

2010· article· en· W2007858189 on OpenAlexaff
Michael G. Brandt, Murad Husein, Damir B. Matic, Andrew Leung, Bret Wehrli, I. Welch, Derek Ho, Zahra Kassam, Ian A. Silver, Philip C. Doyle

Bibliographic record

VenuePlastic & Reconstructive Surgery · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReconstructive Surgery and Microvascular Techniques
Canadian institutionsVictoria HospitalLondon Health Sciences CentreWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPharynxMedicinePharyngeal flapAtrophyPharyngeal musclesSurgeryOral mucosaMuscle atrophyAnatomyVelopharyngeal insufficiencyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Velopharyngeal insufficiency is frequently managed surgically via the superiorly based pharyngeal flap procedure. The flap used in this procedure traditionally consists of both mucosa and muscle. Although muscle is included to potentially increase survival and tissue bulk, its inclusion may result in postoperative dysfunction of pharyngeal sidewall motion. Although the benefits of pharyngeal flap surgery are established, the denervated muscular portion of the flap appears to atrophy. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether a flap consisting entirely of mucosa provides the same tissue bulk as a conventional pharyngeal flap 12 weeks postoperatively. METHODS: Ten laboratory-grade cats served as direct patient surrogates. Cats were randomized to undergo a superiorly based pharyngeal flap procedure with flaps composed of either both muscle and mucosa (n = 5) or mucosa only (n = 5). Blinded volumetric analysis was performed by three board-certified neuroradiologists using magnetic resonance imaging of the pharynx immediately after surgery and at 4, 8, and 12 weeks. RESULTS: At 12 weeks postoperatively, pharyngeal flaps composed of both mucosa and muscle atrophied to reach volumetric equivalence with mucosa-only flaps. Evaluation of final pharyngeal flap volume demonstrated no statistical differences between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates equivalent final superiorly based pharyngeal flap tissue bulk for flaps composed of only mucosa when compared with conventional pharyngeal flaps. Thus, the mucosa-only pharyngeal flap may yield similar outcomes while potentially providing for an earlier return of normal pharyngeal function.

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)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.062
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.237 · 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.

Study designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlastic & Reconstructive SurgerySame topicReconstructive Surgery and Microvascular TechniquesFrench-language works237,207