MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2580042941 · doi:10.1002/micr.30155

The proximal superficial femoral artery perforator flap: Anatomic study and clinical cases

2017· article· en· W2580042941 on OpenAlexaff
Imran Ratanshi, Colin W. McInnes, Avinash Islur

Bibliographic record

VenueMicrosurgery · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReconstructive Surgery and Microvascular Techniques
Canadian institutionsSt. Boniface HospitalUniversity of ManitobaManitoba Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCadaveric spasmPerforator flapsSurgeryFree flapThighMedial compartment of thighDissection (medical)GroinAnatomyMicrosurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The upper thigh has provided multiple new soft tissue free flaps in recent decades, including the anterolateral thigh, anteromedial thigh, transverse upper gracilis, the profunda artery perforator, and superficial circumflex iliac perforator flaps. The purpose of this study is to describe a new, reliable free flap option in the upper thigh: the proximal superficial femoral artery perforator (p-SFAP) flap. METHODS: A cadaveric dissection study was performed to confirm clinical landmarks and evaluate pedicle characteristics. A retrospective review of patients who have received a p-SFAP free flap and surgical technique are described in detail. Eight patients (aged 27-85 years) underwent reconstruction with the p-SFAP flap involving six upper and two lower extremity defects. RESULTS: A consistent pedicle 6 to 8 cm in length was identified in all cadaveric and clinical limbs, emerging from under the lateral aspect of the sartorius muscle and entering the flap approximately 10 cm inferior and 4 cm medial to the anterior superior iliac spine. The perforator took origin off of the superficial femoral artery and femoral vein in all clinical cases. Arterial and venous diameters were 1.2-1.5 mm and 2.0-2.5 mm, respectively. There was one occurrence of partial flap necrosis and one case of complete flap loss. CONCLUSIONS: The p-SFAP flap represents a new, clinically relevant addition to the armamentarium of the reconstructive microsurgeon for use in small to medium sized defects. It can be harvested as a free flap and may have utility as a pedicled flap for groin and perineal 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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.312 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMicrosurgerySame topicReconstructive Surgery and Microvascular TechniquesFrench-language works237,207