Long-term follow-up of donor site morbidity after defect coverage with Integra following radial forearm flap elevation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The radial forearm flap (RFF) is known for its excellent and reliable results regarding defect coverage though donor site morbidity represents a persisting problem. Integra is widely used in reconstructive surgery. This study aims to assess long-term outcomes regarding functionality and cosmesis after donor site coverage with respect to esthetic appearance, scar quality, and wrist function as well as ability to work after donor site coverage with Integra and split-thickness skin. METHODS: The prospective follow-up exam, after a mean time of 23.8 months, enrolled 13 patients. Identification of patients' comorbidities and evaluation of the subjective esthetic outcome, sensibility, cold intolerance, and scar instability was assessed by a questionnaire. In clinics, designed Pinch test assessed scar tissue mobility over the flexor tendons. The Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS) was calculated; wrist function and grip strength were determined. RESULTS: The satisfaction score for the esthetic appearance of the donor site was in average 3.42 ± 0.44. Two patients experienced an unstable scar and cold intolerance. The VSS resulted in a value of 4.2 representing a good result. The pinch test revealed an average scar mobility of 8 mm without any tendon adhesions. Active range of motion of the wrist was equal to the non-operated site as was grip strength. The pinch test showed a significant negative correlation with the VSS making it a reliable tool to measure scar quality. CONCLUSION: Long-term results show an esthetic and functional successful defect coverage of the RFF donor site by the use of Integra and split-thickness skin. Level of Evidence: Level IV, therapeutic study.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".