ArticlePloS one2026
A remote monitoring system based on deep learning for real-time assessment of free flaps.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Diagnostic Accuracy of AI in Prediction and Assessment of Compromised Free Flaps: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeVenous congestion is a major cause of postoperative free flap compromise, and early detection is crucial for improving flap salvage rates and patient outcomes. This study aimed to develop and validate a deep learning (DL)-integrated remote monitoring system with a smartphone application for real-time, quantitative assessment of free flaps, with a specific focus on the early detection of venous congestion.
methodsThis diagnostic study was conducted at our institution. Patients aged 18-60 years who underwent free flap reconstruction between January 2019 and June 2025 were included. The study was divided into three phases: a 5-month model training phase for DL model development and internal validation, a 5-month external validation and clinical application phase, and a 4-month clinical comparison phase. The DL model was developed using TensorFlow Lite and a Flap Segmentation Network (FS-Net). Performance was evaluated through accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), and clinical outcomes including time to detection and flap survival.
resultsA total of 1649 photographs from 615 patients were analyzed in the development and validation of the DL classification model between January 2019 and February 2025. During model development, the model achieved an accuracy of 86.8%, sensitivity of 92.4%, specificity of 79.7%, and AUC of 0.88. Internal validation improved these metrics to 87.6%, 95.0%, 81.1%, and 0.92, respectively. External validation demonstrated the model's generalizability, with an accuracy of 89.3%, sensitivity of 96.2%, specificity of 84.9%, and AUC of 0.93. The clinical application phase showed that the system had an overall accuracy of 92.16%, sensitivity of 95.18%, false-positive rate of 2.62%, and false-negative rate of 4.82%. A total of 113 patients were included in clinical comparison between March 2025 and June 2025. The remote monitoring group exhibited a trend towards a shorter mean time to congestion detection, higher flap survival rate, and shorter mean time to re-exploration, although these differences were not statistically significant.
conclusionsThe DL-integrated remote monitoring system demonstrated high accuracy and reliability in detecting venous congestion. It provided an objective and real-time tool that may help reduce clinical burden and support timely intervention in free flap management. However, its impact on definitive clinical outcomes required further validation in larger studies.
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.