ArticleCureus2025
Scalp Reconstruction With Local Flaps: A Case Series.
Article in Cureus, 2025. 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.
- Article
- Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The scalp, a crucial protective barrier for intracranial structures, undergoes intricate reconstruction procedures, demanding detailed anatomical knowledge. The mnemonic SCALP identifies its layers, influencing successful aesthetic reconstruction. Vascular considerations, orchestrated by branches from carotid arteries, sustain scalp health. The multifaceted nature of scalp defects, driven by diverse causes, underscores reconstruction complexity. Effective surgical planning, assessing intrinsic and extrinsic factors, is imperative. Insights from the Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Department at the "Dr. José Eleuterio González" University Hospital, particularly on local flaps, are shared, highlighting their significance in achieving optimal outcomes. All patients treated during this period were included, with flap types chosen based on defect size for tension-free coverage. Despite the depth of the affected site, local flap reconstruction was successfully employed. The study details flap nourishment, defect location descriptions, and surgical planning, meticulously assessing intrinsic and extrinsic factors. Eighteen patients underwent successful scalp reconstruction, primarily for traumatic (55.5%) and oncological (44.4%) reasons. Male patients dominated (72.2%), and interventions varied across regions, with the parietal area being the most common (44.4%). The postoperative period showed a lack of complications, with all flaps surviving and no wound dehiscence, affirming the efficacy of the reconstruction procedures. The findings contribute valuable insights into optimizing scalp reconstruction outcomes.
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.