V-Y and rectangular flap combination for syndactyly repair
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: For syndactyly repair, several delicate, well-planned flap combination techniques have been reported. This study presents technique details with functional and aesthetic results of a dorsal rectangular and volar V-Y advancement flap combination for web reconstruction and S incisions for finger separation in patients with syndactyly. METHOD: Ten patients with 16 syndactyly webs were treated. Patients were examined in terms of function and aesthetic. Evaluation criteria included the Vancouver Scar Scale, range of motion, degree of web creeping, parent's satisfaction rates, and finger abduction. During the initial period, vascular compromise of fingers, haematoma, infection, seroma, flap necrosis, or graft failures were not noted in any patients. No patients required revision surgery. During the later period, parent satisfaction scores were excellent or good, finger function was complete, and the Vancouver Scar Scale showed that two webs had hyperpigmented areas and two had supple pliability. CONCLUSION: This simple syndactyly release technique can provide a low rate of web creep, good scar quality, and optimal functional results.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.003 | 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".