ArticleJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2024
Clinical effects of different types of flaps selected according to local conditions in the treatment of diabetic foot defects.
Article in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Functional and clinical outcomes of propeller flaps in lower extremity reconstruction: A systematic review.JPRAS open · 2026Review
- [Clinical efficacy of applying orthoplastic principle in treating Gustilo type ⅢB open ankle joint fractures].Zhonghua shao shang yu chuang mian xiu fu za zhi · 2026Article
- Long-term clinical value of the anterolateral thigh perforator flap in the repair of limb soft tissue defects: A case series.Pakistan journal of medical sciences · 2025Article
- A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Anterolateral Thigh Flap Outcomes in High-Risk Diabetic Foot Reconstruction.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Type 3A free anterolateral thigh chimeric flap based on the Zunyi classification for reconstructing diabetic foot wounds.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe repair of diabetic foot defects (DFD) is a major challenge in clinical practice. The purpose of this study was to investigate the difference in clinical efficacy of different flap techniques in repairing DFD wounds, and to compare the difference in clinical efficacy of anterolateral thigh perforator flap (ALTP) in repairing DFD and non-DFD.
methodsThis study is a retrospective clinical study of different types of flap reconstruction in patients with DFD admitted to our hospital from January 2010 to December 2021. A total of 40 patients with DFD and 43 patients with non-DFD were included in this study. Detailed preoperative basic information, intraoperative details, postoperative complications and long-term follow-up results were collected.
resultThe comorbidities, wound infection and wound duration of DFD group were more serious than those of non-DFD group. In addition, the incidence of complications was higher in DFD group, the wound healing time was longer, the aesthetic evaluation, the functional recovery rate of ankle joint and the sensory recovery effect of flaps were worse.
conclusionIn this study, it is concluded that different flap techniques can obtain better clinical efficacy in repairing DFD wounds. Compared with non-DFD wounds, the postoperative risk of DFD wounds using free ALTP flaps is higher, but the risk can be reduced by reasonable preoperative vascular examination. Free flap can deal with various irregular wounds and provide more options for clinical repair. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III, Case-control study.
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.