Reconstruction of Macrocheilia on the Lower Lip Through Bilateral Limited Excision and a Stepwise Single-Stage Approach (BLESS)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The surgical management of macrocheilia secondary to port-wine stains is complicated. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to propose an innovative method for treating macrocheilia on the lower lip. METHODS: Patients who underwent the reconstruction of macrocheilia on the lower lip through the innovative approach were examined. Their preoperative and postoperative standard photographs were taken to evaluate the changes in lip length and thickness. The scores on Vancouver scar scale (VSS) and visual analog scale (VAS) were evaluated. RESULTS: Thirty-two patients who underwent the reconstruction of macrocheilia were examined. A follow-up of 12.2 months (6-36 months) was conducted. The lower lip contour and the mentolabial groove were reconstructed to normal appearance. The lip length was shortened from 5.38 ± 0.49 cm pretreatment to 4.59 ± 0.30 cm posttreatment (p = .016). The exposed vermilion was shortened from 2.05 ± 0.48 cm to 1.26 ± 0.12 cm posttreatment (p < .01). The mean VSS and VAS scores were 2.2 ± 1.5 and 8.4 ± 1.3, respectively. CONCLUSION: The bilateral limited excision and stepwise single-stage approach were safe and effective for reconstructing prominent macrocheilia on the lower lip. The technique was also easy to command for the beginners.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".