Donor-site morbidity of the inferior gluteal artery perforator flap for breast reconstruction in teenagers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: Few options, apart from the buttock area, are available for autologous breast reconstruction in thin teenagers. The aim of the present study was to objectively evaluate and compare donor-site morbidity of the inferior gluteal artery perforator (IGAP) flap with that of the previously described inferior gluteal musculocutaneous flap. METHOD: A retrospective review of all IGAP flaps for breast reconstruction performed in teenagers between June 2006 and April 2011 at the Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine, Montreal, Quebec, was performed. Patients were invited to undergo a specific physical evaluation and complete a questionnaire on aesthetic and functional outcomes. RESULTS: Thirteen records and 11 photographic charts were reviewed. Lateral buttock flattening was noticeable in nine of 11 cases. Three patients experienced some degree of inferior displacement of the gluteal crease. All six patients available for the appointment presented with a zone of dysesthesia or hypoesthesia in the territory of the operated buttock and/or posterior thigh. No motor impairment was found. The questionnaire, completed by eight patients, revealed that six were satisfied or very satisfied with the surgery. Appearance of the operated buttock was rated 3.4 on a scale from 1 to 5 (5 = normal) compared with the normal side. CONCLUSIONS: The IGAP flap remains a suitable option for breast reconstruction in slim teenagers. Similar to the myocutaneous flap, the major donor-site morbidity of the IGAP flap remains sensory impairment involving the posterior femoral cutaneous nerve. There is, however, less visible lateral depression when it is harvested as a perforator flap.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".