The Jaws Brachioplasty: An Original Technique: Improving Aesthetic Outcomes in Arm Lift Procedures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
(1) Background: The increase in the number of bariatric surgery procedures has led plastic surgeons to look for new approaches to improve outcomes of body-contouring surgeries. A major concern in brachioplasty is the scarring process. Here, we propose a novel technique to minimize the incidence of pathological or unsatisfactory scars from brachioplasty. A video of the entire procedure is provided. (2) Methods: From January 2016 to August 2020, we performed the "Jaws" brachioplasty on 16 post-bariatric patients. We evaluated the effectiveness of the technique through pre- and postoperative assessments by patients and surgeons, the Vancouver Scar Scale, and the detection of major and minor complications within 12 months of follow-up. (3) Results: Thirteen patients were female and three were male, with a mean age of 32.5 ± 6.8 years (range: 22-47 years). The BODY-Q© Arms Section scores improved significantly, with no incidence of major or minor complications over 1 year of follow-up, and favorable aesthetic outcomes. (4) Conclusions: We believe that the "Jaws" technique is a valid contribution to post-bariatric surgery, as it aims to solve specific aesthetic problems of scarring from brachioplasty. The small number of patients does not allow the comparison of our original technique to others previously described in the literature.
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 | 0.010 | 0.007 |
| 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 | 0.002 |
| 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".