Three-layer reconstruction of large urethrocutaneous fistulas using scrotal-septal flaps
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTON: The repair of large urethrocutaneous fistulas (UCFs) commonly involves reconstruction of the urethra, waterproof layer and skin coverage, which deploy different tissues from different flaps. To simplify the multiple procedures, we explored to use one flap (a scrotal-septal flap) to reconstruct three layers in UCF repairing in one stage. METHODS: Between January 2011 and July 2012, 29 patients with large UCFs (ranging from 1.0 to 2.0 cm) were treated using scrotal-septal flaps for three-layer reconstruction. Every patient has an unbroken scrotum. The hair follicles in the donor site were destroyed using a radiosurgical knife 2 months before the operation. The flap was divided into three zones, which were flipped, folded, and extended respectively to form the urethra, waterproof layer and skin coverage. RESULTS: The patients were followed up between 6 to 12 months. No fistula recurrence was observed. All flaps survived, except in one case, in which the distal skin flap was lost but stenosis or fistula did not develop. Two patients underwent second operations to refine the aesthetic results. CONCLUSIONS: The scrotal-septal flap can be transferred in an overturning-folding-advancement fashion and can simultaneously involve the reconstruction of the urethra, waterproof barrier and skin coverage. This is a simple and reliable alternative for large UCFs (≤2 cm) repairing at the penoscrotal junction; however, it cannot be used in patients with a damaged scrotal septum.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".