MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2897958446 · doi:10.1055/s-0038-1675146

Long-Term Outcome after Successful Lower Extremity Free Flap Salvage

2018· article· en· W2897958446 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Amir K. Bigdeli, Emre Gazyakan, Volker J. Schmidt, Christoph Bauer, Günter Germann, Christian Radu, Ulrich Kneser, Christoph Hirche

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Reconstructive Microsurgery · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReconstructive Surgery and Microvascular Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSurgeryTerm (time)Outcome (game theory)Free flap

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Vascular occlusion after free flap surgery has become a rare complication but still poses a major challenge. It necessitates urgent re-exploration, but the logistic challenge to provide sufficient resources for the emergency intervention remains. The aim of this study was to analyze the long-term outcome after successful lower extremity free flap salvage. METHODS: A single-center retrospective study including long-term follow-up was approved by the local ethics committee. From January 1999 to December 2010, a total of 581 free flaps were performed for lower extremity reconstruction. Eighty-six flaps required emergency re-exploration, of which 65 could be salvaged. Fifteen salvaged flaps were excluded from the study because of secondary amputation. Of 50 patients, 29 (6 females and 23 males) were eligible for follow-up. The mean follow-up time was 54.5 ± 32.9 months. Health-related quality of life (Short Form 36 [SF-36]) and scar quality (Vancouver Scar Scale [VSS]) were analyzed. RESULTS: The overall flap survival rate was 94.7% and the total loss rate was 5.3%. The re-exploration rate was 14.8% (86 of 581 flaps). The salvage rate was 75.6% (65 of 86 flaps). Twenty-one free flaps were totally lost (24.4%). Partial flap loss occurred in 12 cases (14.0%); 67.5% of the vascular complications occurred during the first 24 hours, 20.9% between 24 and 72 hours, and 11.6% after more than 72 hours. The mean time from the first signs of impaired flap perfusion to re-exploration was 1.3 ± 0.4 hours, and from free tissue transfer to re-exploration was 16.2 ± 1.9 hours. The overall scar appearance was good with an average VSS score of 4.0 points. The average SF-36 physical component score was 54.4 ± 5.4 and the mental component score was 63.1 ± 10.7. CONCLUSION: Careful monitoring and the opportunity for urgent re-exploration are the key to success for free flaps salvage. Following these principles, an acceptable long-term outcome can be achieved.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.266 · 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

Citations56
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Reconstructive MicrosurgerySame topicReconstructive Surgery and Microvascular TechniquesFrench-language works237,207