Lip Lift Flap for Columella Reconstruction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The columella is highly susceptible to damage and the most challenging nasal subunit to reconstruct. Of existing reconstructive techniques, ranging from regional to microsurgical flaps, none are ideal for minimizing the complexity of flap harvest and donor site morbidity. This article describes an alternative local flap for focal columellar defects without other subunit soft tissue defects: lip lift flap. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted of the senior surgeon's patients between July 2022 and September 2023. Patients who underwent the lip lift flap were identified, and their demographics, surgical details, and outcomes were indexed. This modified operative technique for columellar reconstruction is proposed by presenting a case series and literature review. RESULTS: Three patients from a single surgeon had sustained total columellar loss without tip subunit involvement. In all cases, there was subjective aesthetic improvement and excellent color and texture match. No complications were seen, including no poor donor site scarring or flap necrosis. In all cases, coverage of the central and lateral columellar walls was achieved. Costal cartilage strut grafts were able to be placed simultaneously without compromising neovascularization and with complete coverage. CONCLUSION: The application of the lip lift flap was able to provide skin and soft tissue coverage for restoring columellar length and strength with satisfying aesthetics.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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".