Reconstruction of Soft Tissue of the Finger Using Heterodigital Reverse Island Flap
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Reconstruction of soft tissue defects of the fingers is still a challenge. Considering the special characteristics of finger skin, and the "like for like" principle, appropriate reconstruction should use local tissue as much as possible. Here, we introduce a reverse flow type of heterodigital island flap and evaluate the outcome of finger reconstruction using this technique. METHODS: Thirty-two patients who underwent finger reconstruction using heterodigital reverse island flaps between August 2014 and March 2017 were included in this study. The study population consisted of 25 male and 7 female patients, with a mean age of 27.5 years (range, 6-67 years). The defect ranged from 1.5 to 2.5 cm in length and from 1.0 to 2.1 cm in width. RESULTS: All 32 flaps survived intact. After 1 year, the range of motion in the proximal interphalangeal joint was 81.0 ± 5.1, and the range of motion in the distal interphalangeal joint was 71.2 ± 5.7. The mean static 2-point discrimination of the flaps was 5.3 mm (range, 2-8 mm), and the donor finger was 9.2 mm (range, 4-9 mm), which is regarded as good to excellent, by the Modified American Society for Surgery of the Hand Guidelines. The mean visual analog scale (VAS) pain score was 2.5 (range, 0-8). The mean Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS) score of the flap was 3.95 (range, 1-11), and that of the donor site was 1.76 (range, 0-5). The mean follow-up period was 21.6 months (range, 12-36 months). CONCLUSIONS: Given its satisfactory esthetic and functional results, the heterodigital reverse island flap based on a long vascular pedicle in a reverse pattern is a feasible option for reconstruction of defects of the hand.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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".