ArticleWorld journal of plastic surgery2020
Two Perforators Improve the Extent and Reliability of Paraumbilical Flaps for Upper Limb Reconstruction.
Article in World journal of plastic surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Thoracoepigastric Flap: An Effective Reconstructive Method for Large Upper Extremity Defects in Low- and Middle-income Countries-A Single-center Study.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2025Article
- [Application strategy and clinical effects of paraumbilical perforator flap with inferior epigastric vessels in repairing destructive wounds].Zhonghua shao shang za zhi = Zhonghua shaoshang zazhi = Chinese journal of burns · 2021Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundComplex defects of the forearm and arm are best reconstructed with free flaps. Free flaps are however not universally available. They require long operative time and may be contraindicated in patients with extensive injuries due to a lack of good recipient vessels. The alternatives to free flaps are distant flaps such as groin flaps, random abdominal flaps, thoracoepigastric flaps and paraumbilical perforator flaps. These are axial flaps that are limited by the angiosomes supplied by a given perforator or blood vessel. To improve the extent and reliabilities of the paraumbilical flaps, we incorporated two perforators in the flap.
methodsA total of 17 patients with extensive forearm defects were managed by two vessel paraumbilical perforator flaps between January 2013 and December 2018. The perforators were identified by a hand-held Doppler and the flap was fashioned with the perforators at the base.
resultsThe mean length of the flap raised was 19.5 cm and width was 8.3 cm. The median age was 39 years. All the flaps were successful with no incidence of flap necrosis and no dehiscence.
conclusionTwo vessel perforator flaps improved the reliability of the paraumbilical perforator flap, allowing for a bigger flap to be harvested and thus ensuring a cover of larger defects. The flaps were easy to raise and were easily tolerated by the patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.