ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2023
DIY Flap Monitoring: The Glucose Index.
Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Monitoring of Venous and Arterial Occlusion With Remote Interstitial Tissue Glucose Measurement Systems in a Rabbit Free Flap Model.Microsurgery · 2026Article
- Evaluation of Flap Survival Using Local Glucose Measurement in Dogs Undergoing Reconstructive Procedures: Two Case Reports.Veterinary sciences · 2026Article
- Flap Monitoring Techniques: A Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Flap loss is reduced by monitoring, which detects vascular compromise. Glucose levels vary in suffering flaps; therefore, we aimed to show that monitoring flaps with glucose pinprick test is a cheap, reliable, ubiquitous, and easy method. Methods: We reviewed a prospectively kept database. A pinprick test was performed to measure systemic and flap glucose levels. A glucose index (GI; flap glucose/systemic glucose) was calculated. Comparison between the groups (with occlusive event, and without occlusive event) was done. Results: In total, 32 flaps in 29 consecutive patients were included. Eleven (34%) were free flaps. Of these, one (9%) was explored twice. Initially, salvage was achieved. However, 36 hours later, a second exploration was needed but was unsuccessful. Of the 21 pedicled flaps (66%), one (5%) needed exploration (suture release), and three (14%) had partial losses that were not clinically relevant. On the ROC curve, we found a cut-off value for a GI of 0.49 or less with a sensitivity of 95% [95% confidence interval (CI): 75.1 to 99.9%] and a specificity of 100% (95% CI: 98.5 to 100%), with a positive predictive value of 100% (95% CI: 81.5 to 100%) and a negative predictive value of 99.6% (95% CI: 97.8 to 100%) for flap suffering. Conclusions: The GI, as a complement, assists in defining treatment approach. It is an easy, reliable, accessible method that can be performed by nonmedical personnel. Its main drawback is the inability to monitor buried or hard to reach flaps.
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.