Patterns of Sensory and Autonomic Reinnervation of Long-Standing Myocutaneous Microvascular Flaps and Split-Skin Grafts Applied to Fascial Beds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of reports in the literature examining the pattern of sensory and autonomic neural recovery of myocutaneous microvascular flaps and skin grafts to the lower limbs after a prolonged period of time. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the recovery of sensation and autonomic nerve activity in long-standing split-skin grafts applied to fascial beds and in myocutaneous microvascular flaps. METHODS: THE PATIENTS WERE DIVIDED INTO TWO GROUPS: group A consisted of patients with a split-skin graft applied to a fascial bed (n=11) and group B consisted of patients with free microvascular flaps (n=4). Patients in both groups underwent various clinical subjective and objective tests, including the measurement of electrical resistance and thermal sensory analysis. Laser Doppler flowmetry was used to investigate the blood flow patterns. RESULTS: Patients in both groups showed significantly reduced sensory modalities. However, the findings of both the electrical resistance and laser Doppler flowmetry were significantly different among the patients in group A compared with controls. In contrast, electrical resistance and laser Doppler flowmetry test results were similar in group B and controls. CONCLUSIONS: Both split-skin grafts applied to fascial beds and microvascular flaps on the lower limb had poor sensory recovery. However, after 15 years, the microvascular flaps regained the ability to sweat and some degree of thermoregulatory function. This may imply that the long-standing myocutaneous free flaps regained some aspects of their autonomic innervation, whereas the split-skin grafts had not.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".