ArticleInnovative surgical sciences2026
Interdisciplinary reconstructions of the forearm and hand.
Article in Innovative surgical sciences, 2026. 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: This study examines the clinical application of interdisciplinary reconstructive strategies for complex forearm and hand defects. Emphasis is placed on principles guiding flap selection, anatomical localization, and the central role of plastic surgeons within coordinated surgical teams. The aim is to clarify how collaborative planning and technique adaptation influence reconstructive outcomes in upper extremity salvage. Methods: A retrospective review was conducted of 79 patients who underwent upper extremity reconstruction between 2020 and 2024 at a tertiary care center. Inclusion required composite defects of the hand or forearm treated with local, regional, or free flaps. Demographics, etiology, defect location, reconstructive technique, interdisciplinary collaboration, and complications were analyzed descriptively. Results: Most patients were male (n=62), with a mean age of 53.3 years. Defects most often involved the long fingers (n=32) and thumb (n=31). Trauma (68 %) was the main cause, followed by oncologic resection (22 %) and infection (10 %). Free flaps (n=15) were primarily used for larger or composite defects requiring microsurgical reconstruction, while local and regional flaps were employed zone-specifically for smaller soft tissue defects, especially in digits and thumb. Functional reconstruction addressed tendon, nerve, vessel, and bone injuries. The overall complication rate was 12.6 %, with no flap failures or limb loss. Conclusions: Upper limb reconstruction benefits from individualized, anatomy-driven planning and interdisciplinary cooperation. Plastic surgeons play a key role in adapting techniques to anatomical zones, achieving favorable functional and aesthetic 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.