Union and Bone Resorption of Free Fibular Flaps in Mandibular Reconstruction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate bony union and resorption after free fibular flap reconstruction for mandibular reconstruction. METHODS: A total of 112 patients with composite resection and reconstruction with a fibular free flap were included. Computed tomography scan images taken after the reconstruction and approximately 1 year postoperatively were assessed to evaluate union (n = 60) and bone resorption (n = 24) of the neomandible. RESULTS: Most of the fibulas healed well (n = 34) and there was radiologic nonunion in 20% of the neomandibles at the time of evaluation (mean = 15 months). There was a statistically significant reduction in bone height in the native mandible (p = 0.02) and the anterior part of the fibular graft (p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: There was a statistically significant reduction in mandibular and fibular graft height. However, the bone resorption was clinically minimal. Sufficient maintenance of height and good bony union support the use of free fibular flap in mandibular reconstruction.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".