ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2026
Localizing Perforators of the Anterolateral Thigh Flap: Color Doppler Ultrasonography Vs Indocyanine Green Angiography.
Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The anterolateral thigh flap (ALTF) is widely used, but perforator variability and fat distribution affect outcomes. We compared indocyanine green angiography (ICGA) and color Doppler ultrasonography (CDU) for preoperative perforator localization and identified factors affecting accuracy. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 56 ALTF reconstructions (January-July 2024). Perforator distribution in proximal, hot, and distal zones was analyzed. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy were calculated. Multivariate regression assessed 20 variables, including flap thickness and perforator diameter, for their impact on accuracy. Results: ICGA outperformed CDU: sensitivity 92.5% versus 84.9%, specificity 82.0% versus 80.0%, positive predictive value 93.9% versus 84.7%, negative predictive value 90.2% versus 79.2%, accuracy 92.2% versus 82.3%. Localization error did not differ significantly. Multivariate analysis identified flap thickness as independent predictor of ICGA accuracy (odds ratio 0.16; 95% confidence interval, 0.04-0.62; Conclusions: ICGA offers better perforator detection for ALTF planning, though its accuracy declines when flap thickness exceeds 2.35 cm. Proximal zone perforators are more favorable, whereas the hot zone has higher concentration, guiding preoperative mapping.
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.