ArticleJournal of Yeungnam medical science2025
Radial artery superficial palmar branch free flap versus toe pulp free flap for finger pulp reconstruction: a narrative review.
Article in Journal of Yeungnam medical science, 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Finger pulp reconstruction remains a challenging aspect of hand surgery and requires a careful balance between functional restoration and donor-site morbidity. Among the various microsurgical options, radial artery superficial palmar branch (RASP) and toe pulp free flaps have emerged as the two most widely used techniques, each offering distinct advantages. This narrative review comprehensively compares these two microsurgical approaches for finger pulp reconstruction. The RASP free flap harvested from the thenar region provides glabrous palmar tissue with an excellent color match, minimal donor-site morbidity, and the advantage of single-field surgery. However, it lacks the specialized architecture of native finger pulp. In contrast, the toe pulp free flap offers anatomically identical tissue with superior sensory recovery (two-point discrimination, 4-7 mm vs. 6-12 mm for the RASP free flap) and exceptional durability, representing true "like-with-like" reconstruction. Nevertheless, it requires longer operative times and carries significant donor-site morbidity, affecting gait. The selection of these techniques should be individualized based on the defect characteristics, functional demands, and patient factors. The RASP free flap is an excellent first-line option for most defects where standard functional recovery is sufficient, whereas toe pulp transfer remains the gold standard for patients requiring maximal sensory discrimination. Future research should prioritize high-quality comparative studies to evaluate the outcomes of various finger pulp reconstruction techniques.
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.