The clinical application of lateral chest flap transfer combined with relay skin flap transfer to repair soft tissue defects of the chest wall after tumor resection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: After thoracic tumor resection, there is often a large area of soft tissue defect left, even with exposed ribs and sternum, which needs to be repaired by skin flap transplantation. This study aims to introduce lateral thoracic flaps combined with local flaps to repair the soft tissue defect of the chest wall after the repair of malignant tumors, and try to retain the latissimus dorsi myocutaneous flap as a spare repair myocutaneous flap to avoid subsequent tumor recurrence and lack of local flaps for supply body source. Methods: A total of 26 patients with chest wall soft tissue defect with or without exposed rib and sternum after tumor resection at presentation from January 2017 to October 2021 were included in this study. None of the patients required breast reconstruction. Patients ranged in age from 34 to 56 years old. The above patients were treated with lateral thoracic flaps combined with local rotational advancement flaps to repair chest wall soft tissue defects. The postoperative wound healing, scar hyperplasia and recurrence of the patients were followed up. Results: Among the patients in this study, 25 incisions healed by primary incision, 1 incision was delayed, and healed after 10 days of dressing change. Postoperatively, the incisions of the patients were all intact, and there were no complications such as skin necrosis and infection. All patients were followed up for 6-18 months, and the incision healed well without complications such as skin necrosis and infection. Of the patients, 2 males developed dermatofibrosarcoma carina recurrence 6 and 10 months after surgery, respectively. After extensive excision, an ipsilateral latissimus dorsi myocutaneous flap was used to repair the defect. The Vancouver scar scale was used to evaluate the hyperplasia of all incisions at 6 months postoperatively. The mean score was 5.92±1.6. Conclusions: The lateral thoracic flap combined with the local flap to repair the chest wall soft tissue defect after tumor surgery is a strategic decision for surgical treatment, which is beneficial to the sequential surgical treatment of tumor 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 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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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 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".