ReviewDer Unfallchirurg2021
[A systematic approach to plastic surgical foot reconstruction].
Review in Der Unfallchirurg, 2021. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Traumatic forefoot amputation in a 3-year-old boy caused by a lawnmower injury.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2025Article
- [Acute and post-acute soft tissue reconstruction].Unfallchirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSoft tissue defects of the foot are very common sequelae after trauma and require an individual reconstructive approach.
objectiveRecommendations for the treatment of soft tissue injuries to the foot are given. MATERIAL AND
methodsThe criteria of soft tissue reconstruction, postoperative follow-up and complications are first discussed before the therapeutic approach is explained depending on the reconstruction site. Case examples are given for illustration.
resultsDecision making for soft tissue reconstruction of the foot is based on the location, the 3‑dimensional extent of the defect, the patient requirements and concomitant diseases. Standardized treatment algorithms are usually applied that need to be adapted according to individual patient factors. Randomized and local pedicled flaps can be applied for foot reconstruction; however, these options involve a significant risk of complications. Consequently, free flaps are frequently indicated after appropriate preoperative diagnostics of the perfusion of the foot. Due to the vast variety of donor sites, free flaps allow an individualized reconstruction, which is adapted to local and patient requirements.
conclusionPrecise preoperative reconstructive planning and analysis of the vascularization form the foundation for a successful soft tissue reconstruction of the foot. The aims of the individualized approach to soft tissue reconstruction of the foot are stable soft tissue coverage, resistance to weight bearing of the sole of the foot, the ability to wear normal shoes and maintenance of sensibility.
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.