MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2327332784 · doi:10.1097/prs.0000000000001150

SIEA versus DIEP Arterial Complications

2015· article· en· W2327332784 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePlastic & Reconstructive Surgery · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReconstructive Surgery and Microvascular Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDIEP flapMedicineCardiologyInternal medicineBreast reconstruction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The authors analyzed arterial complications in patients undergoing breast reconstruction with superficial inferior epigastric artery (SIEA) flaps compared with deep inferior epigastric artery perforator (DIEP) flaps. The variability, caliber, and angiosome of the SIEA are cited as limitations. Experts currently limit SIEA reconstruction to cases with favorable arterial anatomy on preoperative imaging. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, consecutive flaps for breast reconstruction from the initial 7 years of a single microsurgeon's practice (2007 to 2013) were reviewed. Preoperative imaging was not used. Consistent intraoperative criteria for SIEA flap selection were used. All complications were abstracted independently in duplicate using a standardized form and a priori criteria. RESULTS: One hundred sixty-nine free flaps (SIEA, n = 44; DIEP, n = 125) were performed on 112 patients for unilateral or bilateral breast reconstruction. Significantly more SIEA flaps required reexploration versus DIEP flaps (20 percent versus 7 percent; p = 0.03). Arterial insufficiency was significantly higher among SIEA flaps (14 percent versus 1 percent; p = 0.001). There was no difference in venous insufficiency (p = 0.92). Significantly more SIEA flaps had necrosis requiring intervention (p = 0.03). Ultimately, significantly more SIEA flaps failed completely (14 percent versus 2 percent; p < 0.01). All SIEA flap failures were attributable to arterial thrombosis. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with DIEP flaps, SIEA flaps had significantly higher proportions of reexploration, arterial complication, necrosis, and failure. No difference in venous complications was found. DIEP outcomes agree with existing literature from specialized centers. Complications and failures in SIEA flaps were attributed to arterial thrombosis. Given the authors' practice setting, SIEA flaps are no longer performed. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.430
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.059
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.225 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it