ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2020
Gender-specific Anatomical Distribution of Internal Pudendal Artery Perforator: A Radiographic Study for Perineal Reconstruction.
Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- In-Depth optimization and characterization of prostatic and penile vessel imaging with Ferumoxytol-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging.Medical physics · 2026Article
- Radiographic Study Evaluating Perforator Vessels in the Ischiorectal Fossa for Safe Elevation of Island Flaps.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCancer, trauma, infection, or radiation can cause perineal defects. Fasciocutaneous flaps based on perforator vessels (PV) from the internal pudendal artery (IPA) provide an ideal reconstructive option for moderate defects. We hypothesized that, due to gender differences in the pelvic-perineal region, the anatomical distribution of PV differs between genders.
methodsComputed tomography angiographies from male and female patients without pelvic-perineal pathologies were retrospectively analyzed to study the vascular anatomy of the IPA. The number, size, type, and distribution of PV were recorded and compared between genders. Four anatomical regions were defined to describe the distribution of PV on each perineal side: anterior (A), anterior-central (AC), central-posterior (CP), and posterior (P).
resultsA total of 63 computed tomography angiographies were analyzed (men, 31; women, 32). Each IPA provides 2 ± 1 PV and 5 ± 2 terminal (cutaneous) branches: in both genders, 85% of PV are septocutaneous (15% musculocutaneous). In women, 70.5% of PV are located in AC, 28.2% in CP, 1.2% in A, and 0% in P: average diameter of the PV is 2.4 ± 0.3 mm. In men, 53.7% of PV are located in CP, 43.1% in AC, 3.3% in A, and 0% in P: average diameter of the PV is 2.8 ± 0.5 mm. Gender-specific differences in anatomical distribution of PV are significant (
conclusionsNumber, size, and type of terminal branches of PV of the IPA are consistent between genders, but their distribution is different, with women having an anterior predominance. Knowledge of gender-specific anatomy can guide preoperative planning and intraoperative dissection in flap-based perineal reconstruction.
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.