Effect of autologous platelet adhesives on dermal fat graft resorption following reconstruction of a superficial parotidectomy defect: A double‐blinded prospective trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Dermal fat grafts are used to reconstruct facial contour defects but may undergo variable resorption. Application of autologous platelet adhesive may improve outcomes. The primary objective was to compare resorption of dermal fat grafts for parotidectomy defects, between patients receiving autologous platelet adhesive versus controls. METHODS: This was a double-blinded prospective cohort at a tertiary care center. Volumetric analyses of dermal fat graft measured by MRI scans. Resorption was determined by comparing 1- and 6-month MRIs in each patient. Complications, Frey's Syndrome, and patient satisfaction were also assessed. RESULTS: Twelve patients completed the study. A significant reduction in graft resorption was seen in the treatment group (57% vs. 31%, p = .01). Three patients in the control group developed fat liquefaction. Patient perceived significant differences in scar and contour. CONCLUSION: Application of autologous platelet adhesives improved graft viability and patient satisfaction at 6 months.
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) | 0.001 | 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 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".