The use of a modified abbé island flap to reconstruct primary lip defects of over 80 %
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Lip reconstruction for defects greater than 80 % present a challenge in maintaining acceptable oral function and good aesthetic results. Abbé flaps offer an excellent reconstructive option but are limited to defects under 65 %. METHODS: We describe a two-stage "modified Abbé island flap" technique whereby a full-thickness myocutaneous flap is combined with a modified Karapandzic flap, allowing for reconstruction of total and near total lip defects. RESULTS: Six patients underwent successful two-stage lower and upper lip reconstruction with this technique. Oral competence and satisfactory aesthetic outcomes were achieved in all six cases. There were no complications. Although microstomia was noted to a certain extent, we argue this impact to be less than the morbidity of a free flap that lacks sphincteric function. CONCLUSION: The "Modified Abbé Island Flap" can be used to reconstruct near-total lip defects using locally innervated, well-vascularized tissues that recreate the oral sphincter and restore oral competence. The combination of the conventional Abbé flap with a modified Karapandzic flap provides reliable results and significantly reduces operating time.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".