MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406335183 · doi:10.1111/jocd.16755

A Retrospective Cohort Study Comparing the Clinical Outcomes of the Hydrosurgery System and Traditional Single‐Incision Surgery for Axillary Osmidrosis

2025· article· en· W4406335183 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mu He, Xiaoqiang Liu, Jinghong Zhang, Ying Chen, Jiaping Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cosmetic Dermatology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSympathectomy and Hyperhidrosis Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSurgeryHematomaRetrospective cohort studyMedical recordComplicationIncidence (geometry)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To compare the postoperative scarring, complication rates, and efficacy between the hydrosurgery system and traditional single-incision surgical techniques for treating axillary osmidrosis. METHODS: A retrospective collection was conducted of all patients who underwent radical surgery for axillary osmidrosis at the Day Surgery Unit of the Department of Plastic Surgery at the First Affiliated Hospital of the Army Medical University from January 2023 to January 2024. Patients were screened based on inclusion and exclusion criteria and divided into the hydrosurgery group and the traditional surgery group. The evaluation was done through medical records, follow-up records, electronic questionnaires, and photographs. Assessments included 6-month postoperative scarring conditions, comprehensive effectiveness scores, postoperative odor/hair/sweating scores, postoperative dermatological life quality scores, and complication rates. RESULTS: A total of 73 patients completed this study: 34 in the hydrosurgery group and 39 in the traditional surgery group. 6 months postoperatively, the hydrosurgery group had significantly lower scores of the Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS), 0.5 (range 0.0-2.0) compared with 1.5 (range 0.5-3.0) in the traditional surgery group (p = 0.018). The incidence of complications such as subcutaneous hematoma, epidermal necrosis, and wound dissidence was also lower (26.5% vs. 51.3%, p = 0.031). Additionally, the surgical incision length in the hydrosurgery group was significantly smaller than in the traditional surgery group (1.200 cm (1.000, 1.275) vs. 2.500 cm (2.500, 3.000), p < 0.001). There were no significant differences between the two groups regarding comprehensive effectiveness scores, postoperative odor/hair/sweating scores, postoperative dermatological life quality index, and surgical duration. CONCLUSION: Compared with traditional single-incision surgical techniques, patients in the hydrosurgery group exhibited lower scar scores 6 months postsurgery, required smaller surgical incisions, and had lower rates of surgical complications. Thus, the hydrosurgery is suitable for the minimally invasive surgical treatment of axillary osmidrosis, offering a safe, effective, and aesthetically superior treatment method.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.065
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.264 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cosmetic DermatologySame topicSympathectomy and Hyperhidrosis TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207