ReviewJPRAS open2026
Pedicled extensor digitorum brevis flap for the distal third lower limb reconstruction: A review of the literature.
Review in JPRAS open, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Reconstruction of the distal lower limb is often complex due to limited local tissues. The pedicled extensor digitorum brevis (EDB) flap is a reliable, loco-regional option for small- to medium-sized ankle and foot defects. This review summarizes literature on pedicled EDB flaps, focusing on indications, outcomes, and donor-site morbidity. Materials and methods: A search of PubMed, Embase, and Scopus (1987-2024) using predefined terms identified studies on pedicled EDB flaps for lower limb reconstruction. Exclusions included anatomical studies, case reports, and free or multiple flaps. Out of 88 records, 26 met criteria, covering 296 patients. Results: Trauma was the leading indication for reconstruction (31.4%), followed by postsurgical dehiscence, infections, and chronic ulcers. Most flaps were pure muscle with an average size of 14.55 cm², covering defects of about 11.89 cm². Complications included total necrosis (4.4%) and partial necrosis (3.7%), all in antegrade flaps. Donor-site issues were limited, mainly delayed healing (5.1%) and wound dehiscence (5.1%), rarely causing major problems. Discussion: The pedicled EDB flap offers predictable anatomy, easy harvest, and minimal functional issues, ideal for small- to medium-sized defects when microsurgery isn't available. However, necrosis risk and trauma links emphasize the need for careful patient selection and vascular assessment. Conclusion: The pedicled EDB flap is a reliable option for distal lower-limb reconstruction, showing good results with manageable complications. More studies are needed to define its long-term role.
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.