Reconstruction of a Full-Thickness Alar Wound Using An Auricular Conchal Composite Graft
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nasogastric intubation has become a frequently used method for alleviating gastrointestinal symptoms. Necrosis from alar pressure during prolonged nasogastric and nasotracheal intubation is common, and can result in considerable deformity if it is unrecognized. The reconstruction of full-thickness alar wounds often requires multiple challenging surgical procedures. Difficult full-thickness alar defects often require nasal mucosal replacement for lining, cartilage batten graft support for the preservation of nasal function, and skin coverage for the restoration of an aesthetically correct appearance. Free composite conchal grafting can offer a single-staged, one-step repair of difficult full-thickness alar wounds that are no larger than 1.5 cm in size. A thorough explanation of the graft design and execution is presented, as well as a case report and literature review. Free composite conchal grafting can produce aesthetic and functional results that rival the most sophisticated flap reconstructions of the lateral ala.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".