Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40321322›Full record

ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2025

Challenging the Dogma of Dead Space Obliteration With Muscle Flaps in Deep Spinal Surgical Site Infections.

Bendik Trones Antonsen, Sven Weum, Louis de Weerd

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Bendik Trones AntonsenFrom the Faculty of Health Science, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway.
Sven WeumDermatoplastic Imaging Research Group, Department of Clinical Medicine, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway.
Louis de WeerdDermatoplastic Imaging Research Group, Department of Clinical Medicine, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: A deep surgical site infection (SSI) after spinal surgery is a serious complication. The defect formed is often a complex 3-dimensional dead space due to tissue loss, frequently containing spinal hardware. Traditionally, obliteration of that dead space is performed with the use of muscle flaps. We challenge this dogma in reconstructive surgery by using the medial dorsal intercostal artery perforator (MDICAP) flap as an alternative in the reconstruction. It adheres to the concept of replacing "like with like," as there are no muscles at the posterior midline. Methods: A retrospective study was performed of a cohort of 18 patients with deep SSI and a posterior midline defect after spinal surgery who received reconstruction with the MDICAP flap. A review of postoperative imaging with focus on dead space was performed. Results: All patients had satisfactory functional and aesthetic outcomes. No patients had a recurrent deep SSI during follow-up (average 64 mo, range 3-384 mo). In the 16 patients who had postoperative imaging performed, dead space was not present at the flaps' recipient site. Conclusions: The MDICAP flap is a good alternative to muscle flaps in reconstructive surgery for complex posterior midline defects caused by a deep SSI after spinal surgery. Postoperative imaging showed no dead space with the use of MDICAP flaps. All patients had an uneventful postoperative course with no recurrent infections. This challenges the dogmata of (1) the need for muscle flaps in such reconstruction and (2) the obligate need for dead space obliteration at the time of operation.

Identifiers

PMID40321322
PMCPMC12045538

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.