Keystone Flap for Closure of Skin Cancer Defects on the Upper Extremity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: We sought to examine the efficacy of the Keystone Design Perforator Island Flap (KDPIF) for the reconstruction of skin cancer excision defects isolated to the upper extremity. In particular, to examine the size of defects repaired and the complications associated with the keystone flap procedure isolated to the upper extremity. Methods: This is a retrospective chart review including all patients older than 18 years of age who received a KDPIF procedure between February 2013 and February 2019 for the oncologic reconstruction of skin cancer defects isolated to the upper extremities by a single surgeon. All procedures were done according to the original description by Behan. Results: A total of 32 patients, 18 (56%) male and 14 (44%) female, received 35 keystone flaps between February 2013 and February 2019. The mean age of the males and females was 70.5 and 79.7 years of age, respectively. Thirty-five lesions suspicious for cancer were excised and 14 (40%) basal cell carcinoma (BCC), 11 (31%) squamous cell carcinoma (SCC), 9 (26%) melanoma, and 1 (3%) actinic keratoses diagnoses were histopathologically determined. Skin defect excisions varied from 3.53 cm 2 to 31.42 cm 2 . No intraoperative or postoperative complications occurred. Conclusions: The keystone flap is a successful versatile flap procedure with a low or absent complication rate for the reconstruction of skin cancer excision defects of various locations (eg arm, hand, elbow, forearm, shoulder, and wrist), cancer pathologies, and sizes on the upper extremity. When needed, a Doppler may successfully identify adequate perforating blood vessels for the relatively larger flaps.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".