Reduced venous thrombosis and re‐exploration time with anastomotic coupling device: A cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: In the anastomotic coupling device literature, no comparative study has reported operative times, included consecutive patients, or used a matched comparison group. Our objective was to analyze patency and operative time in free flaps with venous anastomoses performed with ACD versus hand-sewn. METHODS: For consecutive free flaps, re-explorations and complications were reviewed in duplicate. Operative times for ACD versus hand-sewn were compared for: (1) matched unilateral DIEPs, and (2) re-explorations. RESULTS: Overall, 147 ACD and 144 hand-sewn flaps were included. Venous thrombosis was significantly lower with ACD (1/147[1%] vs.9/144[6%], P < 0.01). There was no difference in re-exploration for venous insufficiency, or overall re-exploration. Re-exploration time was significantly shorter with ACD (69mins vs.205mins, P = 0.009). CONCLUSIONS: ACD significantly decreases venous thrombosis compared to hand-sewn veins, and significantly shortens re-exploration time. Outcomes allow an estimate of cost utility for the ACD in decreasing venous thromboses and shortening re-exploration time. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Microsurgery 36:372-377, 2016.
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) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".