ArticleOTA international : the open access journal of orthopaedic trauma2025
Clinical outcomes of the reverse sural flap when performed by orthopaedic trauma surgeons.
Article in OTA international : the open access journal of orthopaedic trauma, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To evaluate reverse sural flap (RSF) outcomes when performed by nonmicrovascular trained orthopaedic trauma surgeons. Design: Retrospective cohort. Setting: Single level 1 trauma center. Patients: Seventeen patients undergoing RSF for soft tissue coverage of distal 1/3rd leg and/or hindfoot wounds. All patients were managed and followed by 2 nonmicrovascular trained orthopaedic surgeons until RSF healing or failure. Intervention: Reverse sural flap for coverage of distal leg and/or hindfoot wounds. Main Outcome Measurements: RSF survival, percent viability, healing time, and cosmetic outcome. Patient demographic data, comorbidities, and indication for coverage were evaluated in relation to flap survival. Results: Flap viability was noted in 14/17 patients, with 3/17 patients experiencing RSF necrosis or failure. Two of three flap failure cases presented with surgical site infection after RSF. The remaining flap failure resulted from an inability to follow weight-bearing restrictions leading to flap shearing and coagulation. Diabetes was present in 2 of 3 flap failure cases. Cosmetic outcomes among the surviving flaps were excellent or good in 12/14 patients, with an average soft tissue healing time of 57.4 days (23-116 days). Conclusion: The RSF is a powerful and reliable technique for soft tissue coverage of the distal leg and hindfoot that can be performed without microvascular training. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level IV.
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.