ReviewMicrosurgery2026
Emergency Free Flap Reconstruction in Traumatic Extremity Injuries: Clinical Indications and Framework.
Review in Microsurgery, 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEmergency free flap reconstruction (EFFR) involves flap coverage performed during initial operative intervention or within 24 h after traumatic injury. Although EFFR offers notable advantages, standardized criteria for its application are not well established. This manuscript proposes a treatment framework outlining three primary indications for EFFR, including the use of viable tissue from spare parts.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed 14 patients (15 flaps) with traumatic limb-threatening injuries treated with EFFR across two academic centers from 2016 to 2024. Data collected included patient demographics, injury patterns, operative details, and clinical outcomes, with results compared to existing literature. Functional recovery was defined as independent ambulation for lower extremity injuries and restoration of range of motion for upper extremity or digital injuries.
resultsThe cohort (mean age 35 years; 79% male) presented three key indications for 15 EFFR flaps: spare part utilization (47%, n = 7), immediate coverage of exposed critical structures (20%, n = 3), and distal revascularization using flow-through flaps (33%, n = 5). Flap success rate was 87%, with an overall complication rate of 47%. In multiple cases, spare part flaps preserved functional levels of amputation, such as the below-elbow or below-knee level. Functional recovery averaged 5 months (range, 2-11), and mean hospital stay was 15 days (range, 8-39).
conclusionsEFFR is effective for traumatic limb salvage when tailored to specific indications. Our experience-based framework offers structured guidance based on spare part use, timely soft-tissue coverage, and distal revascularization, supporting this acute orthoplastic approach for care of traumatic injuries. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4:
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.