Axial pattern flaps based on the dorsal and ventral perineal arteries: A cadaveric study in dogs and a case report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe the angiosomes of the dorsal and ventral perineal arteries in dogs and identify landmarks for axial pattern flaps based on these vessels. To describe the differences between male and female dogs regarding their respective angiosomes. To present a case report demonstrating the successful use of the dorsal perineal artery skin flap to reconstruct a perianal wound. STUDY DESIGN: Anatomic study. ANIMALS: Eight canine cadavers: four males and four females. One clinical canine case. METHODS: Nonselective barium sulfate angiography was performed via injection of the descending aorta. Skin excised from the perineum and thighs was evaluated via gross inspection and radiography to identify angiosomes. A single clinical case utilizing the dorsal perineal artery axial pattern flap was used to reconstruct a wound in a live dog. RESULTS: A primary cutaneous branch of the ventral perineal artery was identified consistently in all cadavers with positive contrast radiography. The ventral perineal artery cutaneous angiosome was subjectively more robust than the dorsal perineal angiosome. A cutaneous branch of the dorsal perineal artery was observed radiographically in all specimens. The primary cutaneous angiosomes of both arteries extended at least two-thirds of the length of the caudal thigh. In the clinical case, a perineal wound was repaired successfully with a dorsal perineal artery flap. CONCLUSION: The ventral and dorsal perineal arteries possessed robust cutaneous angiosomes with apparently abundant vasculature and broad coverage on the caudal thigh, which were consistent in male and female cadavers. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The dorsal and ventral perineal arteries provide a rich blood supply to the skin of the caudal thigh. Axial pattern skin flaps created within these angiosomes may survive consistently.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".