ArticleCureus2024
Smartphone Thermal Imaging for Preoperative Perforator Mapping in Perforator Based Flaps.
Article in Cureus, 2024. 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.
- Review
- Perfusion in Pedicled Skin Flaps: Initial Insights from Smartphone-Based Thermal Imaging Protocol.Journal of personalized medicine · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo determine the diagnostic accuracy of smartphone thermal imaging for preoperative perforator mapping in perforator-based flaps, taking visual inspection as gold standard. METHODOLOGY: It was a cross-validation study conducted at the Department of Plastic Surgery, Dr. Ruth K. Pfau Civil Hospital, Karachi, Pakistan, from August 2022 to January 2023. All adult patients aged 18 to 40 years of either gender undergoing perforator flap surgery were included. Each patient followed the same treatment regimen, which involved the preoperative identification of the perforator location using the FLIR One camera. Subsequently, confirmation was achieved during the surgical procedure through visual inspection. A two-by two table was used to calculate sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and diagnostic accuracy.
resultsThe mean age of the patients was 30.10±6.87 years, ranging from 18 to 40 years. Most of the patients were males (58.7%), and 41.3% were females. Almost 80.4% were pedicle flaps, and 19.6% were free flaps. The accuracy of thermal imaging was found to be 83.2%, with a sensitivity of 84.3%, a specificity of 80%, a PPV of 92.9%, and a NPV of 62.2%, respectively.
conclusionSmartphone-based thermal imaging is useful for the diagnosis of perforators and has high sensitivity and specificity.
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.