Limb Salvage Using Microsurgical Free Tissue Transfer in Severe Frostbite
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Frostbite is often managed conservatively; however, in severe cases, microsurgical free tissue transfer is required for soft tissue coverage and limb salvage. Given its rarity, the techniques and outcomes of these cases are not well described. The purpose of this report is to present the largest case series, to date, of frostbite injuries requiring microsurgical reconstruction for limb salvage. METHODS: A single-center retrospective review was conducted of all patients who underwent free tissue transfer by a single surgeon from 2008 to 2022. Patients of all ages were included if they suffered a frostbite injury requiring free tissue transfer. Demographics, operative details, and surgical outcomes were recorded. RESULTS: Eight patients with frostbite injuries were included in the report. Patients had frostbite injuries either to the lower extremities (n = 4) or to both upper and lower extremities (n = 4). Sixteen free flaps were done in total including four paired chimeric and eight single free flaps. Flap recipient sites included knees (n = 5), foot/ankle (n = 3), dorsal hands (n = 2), and thumbs (n = 2). All 16 flaps survived. Five patients had complications: four with major complications requiring operative management and two with minor complications requiring conservative management. Mean follow-up time was 505.7 days (range 115-1564). All lower extremity reconstructions were able to weight-bear at an average of 125.2 days post-injury (range 87-164). CONCLUSIONS: This case series demonstrates that free tissue transfer is a robust option for soft tissue coverage and functional limb salvage in patients with severe frostbite injuries to both upper and lower extremities.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".