The Vascular Basis of Perforator Flaps Based on the Source Arteries of the Lateral Lumbar Region
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Perforator flaps based on the integument of the trunk have been well described in the literature; however, the anatomy of many donor sites has yet to be adequately documented. The integument of the lateral lumbar region of the trunk is supplied by a number of source arteries (lower posterior intercostal, lumbar, superior epigastric, deep inferior epigastric, superficial inferior epigastric, superficial circumflex iliac, deep circumflex iliac) whose large perforators may be suitable for perforator flap harvest. The purpose of the current study was to describe the vascular anatomy of these perforators in the lateral lumbar region. METHODS: A series of five fresh human cadavers were studied using a lead oxide-gelatin injection technique. The integument of the trunk (10 sides or hemitrunk specimens) was dissected, and the perforating vessels (diameter > or =0.5 mm) were identified, noting vascular origin, diameter, and pedicle length. Radiographs of tissue specimens were digitally analyzed using the software Scion Image for Windows (Scion Corp., Frederick, Md.) to determine vascular territories. RESULTS: The source vessels contributed a summed mean of 33 perforators per hemitrunk, with a mean emerging vessel diameter of 0.7 +/- 0.2 mm and a corresponding mean superficial pedicle length of 31 +/- 24 mm. The total area of skin supplied directly by these 33 perforators was 1200 cm2, equating to a mean area of 37 cm2 per perforator. CONCLUSION: The authors have comprehensively described the anatomy of perforators of the lateral lumbar region of the trunk.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 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".