RETRACTED: Four cases of abdominal expander implantation in adult chronic osteomyelitis of lower extremity with soft tissue defect and literature review
Post-publication record
OpenAlex flags this work as retracted, but it carries no matching Retraction Watch record in this frame.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In this study, we intend to explore the clinical efficacy of abdominal expander implantation combined with flap technique in adult chronic osteomyelitis of lower limb with soft tissue defects, and to provide the basis for the promotion of the technique in clinical practice. Four patients diagnosed with chronic osteomyelitis of lower extremity with soft tissue defect were enrolled in this prospective study. Evaluation indicators included state of flap survival, state of abdominal incision, surrounding of abdominal wound scar, satisfaction of the patient, state of flap survival half a year after surgery, whether the 3D prosthesis is successfully implanted and limb movement. Four patients had complete flap survival, two of whom had a small amount of skin graft survival disorder in the vascular pedicle area, which improved after 1 month of dressing change. The expander had an average expansion time of 31.5 days, an average water injection of 525 mL, and an average skin volume taken of 159 cm 2 . No incision exudation, incision dehiscence, subcutaneous exudate and other complications occurred. The mean Vancouver Scar Scale score at 3 months after surgery was 3.5 (range from 3 to 6) points. Four patients showed good flap survival at six‐month follow‐up. 3D printed prosthesis were all successfully implanted. The treatment of adult chronic osteomyelitis of lower extremities with lower abdominal implantable expander combined with flap technique can effectively increase the skin harvesting area, reduce the suture tension of abdominal skin harvesting area and the scar hyperplasia of abdominal skin harvesting area.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".