Efficiency of Cephalic Vein Only Anastomosis During Radial Forearm Free Flap
Bibliographic record
Abstract
IMPORTANCE: The closure technique for the radial forearm free flap (RFFF), a commonly utilized flap in head and neck reconstruction, remains a debated topic as there are unique advantages and drawbacks to each technique. OBJECTIVE: The present study aims to report on the outcomes of the closure of the RFFF with the superficial cephalic vein (CV)-only system in terms of venous compromise and flap survival. METHODS (DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, INTERVENTION, MEASURES): A retrospective review of patients who underwent head and neck reconstruction with RFFF between January 2015 and May 2021 at the authors' institution was performed. Cases were categorized as superficial, dual, and deep systems. Multiple population and operative variables were collected for the study group. RESULTS: In total, 221 cases of RFFF were included, of which 169 (76.5%) cases were performed using the CV alone, whereas the remaining 52 (22.5%) cases utilized either the dual or the deep system alone. The operative time in the superficial group was 265 minutes. There were 9 venous complications in the CV group, of which 5 required re-exploration in the operating room and 4 were treated conservatively. All venous-related flap complications were salvaged. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: A majority of the RFFF cases could successfully be completed using the CV as the sole venous drainage, with high rates of flap survival, low complications, and low operative time.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".