The Superiorly Based Partial Rectus Abdominis and External Oblique Flap: A New Technique for Breast Asymmetry Reconstruction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Breast asymmetry has a wide spectrum of presentations with several employable strategies for surgical correction. Historically, the external oblique muscle has proven to be a versatile flap option for the reconstruction of both local and distant defects. It has also been described for use in breast reconstruction for coverage of the lower pole of implant prostheses. The external oblique muscle flap can be harvested in several ways to capture overlying fat and skin. In this study, we describe the use of a superiorly based partial rectus and external oblique flap for surgical correction of lower pole breast hypoplasia. This flap provides vascularized autologous volume to the lower pole of the breast with minimal donor morbidity. Other advantages of this flap are that it can increase the nipple to inframammary fold distance and lower the inframammary fold. This technique represents an evolution of an under-utilized flap and is the first study describing the use of the external oblique flap in the management of breast asymmetry.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".