The Anatomical Basis of the Deep Circumflex Iliac Artery Perforator Flap with Iliac Crest
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Perforator flaps are increasingly used because of advantages including reduced flap bulk, less donor-site morbidity, and more donor-site options. The deep circumflex iliac artery (DCIA) osteomusculocutaneous flap with iliac crest has been one of the most useful flaps used for mandibular reconstruction. However, its use has been limited by its bulkiness and added donor-site morbidity because of the inclusion of an "obligatory muscle cuff" of abdominal muscle. Early results at designing a DCIA perforator flap to circumvent this problem have been varied. Details regarding the location, number, and reliability of DCIA musculocutaneous perforators have been conflicting. The purpose of this study was to comprehensively document the anatomical basis of the DCIA perforator flap. METHODS: Six fresh bodies underwent whole-body lead oxide injection (n = 12 specimens). Landmarks were identified with radiopaque markers. Dissection, angiography, and photography were used to document the precise course of individual perforators in the flank region. Angiograms were assembled with Adobe Photoshop and analyzed with Scion Image Beta. RESULTS: An average of 1.6 DCIA perforators with a diameter of 0.7 mm was present in 92 percent of specimens. Perforators were located 5 to 11 cm posterior to the anterior superior iliac spine, 1 to 35 mm superior to the iliac crest, with a perforator zone of 31 cm. The DCIA perfused the medial aspect of the iliac crest. CONCLUSIONS: This article establishes the anatomical basis of the DCIA perforator flap with iliac crest. This perforator flap, along with a split iliac crest, will likely diminish donor-site morbidity and facilitate oromandibular reconstruction.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".