Head and Neck Reconstruction with Venous Flap: A Case Report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary: Venous flaps are nonphysiologic flaps in which the venous system replaces the vascular circuit found in conventional flaps, serving as inflow as well as outflow. Although a main concern with venous flaps has been their reliability, this can be improved by manipulating their physiology using shunt restriction. The soft, pliable tissue provided by venous flaps coupled with the low donor site morbidity and ease of flap harvest make them ideal for coverage of moderate-sized facial defects, which may be too large for local options yet too small for conventional free flaps. We report the use of a large, 70 cm2 arterialized venous free flap to reconstruct a complex forehead deficit after basal cell carcinoma resection. Furthermore, we present the first report of the successful use of valvulotomes in the case of a large, reverse flow arterialized venous flap where several in-series valves were found to prevent adequate perfusion of the flap. Upon removal of the valves, complete perfusion of the flap was 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 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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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".