Reconstruction of Lower Extremity Defects Using the Serratus Anterior Free Flap: A Systematic Review and Retrospective Case Series
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Free tissue transfer is the most common modality for distal third lower extremity reconstruction, yet complication rates remain high. The serratus anterior muscle free flap, which can be harvested alone or as a chimeric flap, is a robust and reliable option that remains the primary modality for distal third lower extremity defects at our institution. The objective of this study was to perform a systematic review of lower extremity reconstruction with the serratus anterior free flap and provide a retrospective review of cases at our institution. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was conducted using PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library (PROSPERO CRD42018110692). Articles reporting reconstruction of lower extremity and foot defects using serratus anterior free flaps in adults were included. A retrospective cohort study of serratus anterior free flaps was then performed from 2012 to 2018 at our institution. RESULTS: Thirty-seven articles meeting inclusion criteria provided data on 198 flaps: 125 (63%) serratus-only flaps and 73 (37%) chimeric flaps based on the subscapular axis. Among the serratus-only flaps, defects were primarily due to chronic wounds (51%) or acute infections (33%). Flap survival rate was 97%, and the major and minor complication rates were 5 and 9%, respectively. Of the 10 cases included in the case series, flap survival rate was 100%, there were no major complications, and the minor complication rate was 44%. The average time to flap healing was 95 days and average lower extremity functional scale score was 58/80 among five patients. CONCLUSION: Serratus anterior muscle free flaps are a versatile and reliable option for distal third lower extremity 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 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 | 0.004 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.013 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".