Biological Glue as an Alternative to Suction Drainage in Tissue-Expanded Flaps in Children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Biological glue is already used as a hemostatic agent and tissue adhesive in plastic surgery. This study evaluates the use of this glue as an alternative to suction drainage for the adhesion of tissue-expanded flaps in pediatric patients. METHODS: This is a retrospective, multicenter case-control study on 48 flap procedures conducted on 42 children (5 months-12 years of age) between 2004 and 2017, comparing a "glue" group (n = 24) with a control group (n = 24), in which a classic redon drain was used. The control patients were matched according to age, etiology, location of the lesion, and the size of the expander. The primary end point was the duration of hospital stay. RESULTS: The conditions were 24 cases of congenital nevus, 14 of cicatricial alopecia, and 10 of sebaceous hamartoma. Twenty-nine lesions were located on the scalp, 15 on the back, 2 on the thigh, and 2 on the buttocks.The average surgical durations (48 ± 24 vs 63 ± 32 minutes, P = 0.13) and average room occupancy time (126 ± 21 vs 139 ± 44 minutes, P = 0.29) were similar between the glue group and the control group. However, the average duration of hospital stay was lower in the glue group (1.5 ± 1.5 days) than in the control group (3.6 ± 1.3 days, P < 0.0001). The complication rates between the groups were similar. CONCLUSIONS: The application of glue on expanded flaps is as reliable as suction drainage with the advantage of reducing the duration of hospital stay and potentially enabling outpatient treatment for certain patients.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".