Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Arteries of the Head and Neck01:26

Arteries of the Head and Neck

3.6K
The human body's intricate network of arteries ensures that every organ system receives the necessary oxygen and nutrients for optimal function. The arterial network in the head and neck region is particularly complex, providing vital blood flow to the brain, eyes, and other critical structures. Prominent arteries in this region include the internal carotid arteries and the vertebral arteries.
The internal carotid arteries supply blood to the anterior portion of the cerebrum. They enter the...
3.6K
Veins of Head and Neck01:19

Veins of Head and Neck

5.8K
The blood drainage from the head and neck is primarily managed by three pairs of veins: the external jugular, internal jugular, and vertebral veins. The external jugular veins drain superficial scalp and face structures, passing over the sternocleidomastoid muscles to empty into the subclavian veins.
On the other hand, the vertebral veins, unlike their arterial counterparts, are not primarily responsible for brain drainage. Instead, they drain the cervical vertebrae, spinal cord, and some small...
5.8K
Introduction to z Scores01:06

Introduction to z Scores

11.3K
A z score (or standardized value) is measured in units of the standard deviation. It tells you how many standard deviations the value x is above (to the right of) or below (to the left of) the mean, μ. Values of x that are larger than the mean have positive z scores, and values of x that are smaller than the mean have negative z scores. If x equals the mean, then x has a zero z score. It is important to note that the mean of the z scores is zero, and the standard deviation is one.
z scores...
11.3K
Introduction to z Scores01:05

Introduction to z Scores

1.4K
A z score (or standardized value) is measured in units of the standard deviation. It indicates how many standard deviations the value x is above (to the right of) or below (to the left of) the mean, μ. Values of x that are larger than the mean have positive z scores, and values of x that are smaller than the mean have negative z scores. If x equals the mean, then x has a zero z score. It is important to note that the mean of the z scores is zero, and the standard deviation is one.
z scores...
1.4K
z Scores and Area Under the Curve01:17

z Scores and Area Under the Curve

19.7K
z scores are the standardized values obtained after converting a normal distribution into a standard normal distribution. A z score is measured in units of the standard deviation. The z score tells you how many standard deviations the value x is above (to the right of) or below (to the left of) the mean, μ. Values of x that are larger than the mean have positive z scores, and values of x that are smaller than the mean have negative z scores. If x equals the mean, then x has a z score of...
19.7K
Predicting Reaction Outcomes02:24

Predicting Reaction Outcomes

11.0K
Kinetics describes the rate and path by which a reaction occurs. In contrast, thermodynamics deals with state functions and describes the properties, behavior, and components of a system. It is not concerned with the path taken by the process and cannot address the rate at which a reaction occurs. Although it does provide information about what can happen during a reaction process, it does not describe the detailed steps of what appears on an atomic or a molecular level. On the other hand,...
11.0K

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Systemic Inflammation, Tumor Isotopic Signatures, and Prognosis in Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma: Exploratory Integration of Blood- and Tissue-Derived Biomarkers-An Exploratory Retrospective Secondary Analysis.

Journal of clinical medicine·2026
Same author

Dendriplexes in alveolar rhabdomyosarcoma therapy.

International journal of pharmaceutics·2026
Same author

Temperature and developmental stage govern intestinal susceptibility to human coronavirus 229E.

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America·2026
Same author

Defect-Driven and Age-Related Patterns of Flap Selection in Pediatric Mandibular Reconstruction.

Journal of clinical medicine·2026
Same author

Perioperative Anesthetic Factors and Flap Outcome in Pediatric Head and Neck Free Flap Reconstruction: A Retrospective Study.

Journal of clinical medicine·2026
Same author

Emergence Angle, Marginal Bone Loss, and Radiographic Corticalization Around MIS Implants: A 5-Year Retrospective Study of Single, Splinted, and Bridge Restorations.

Journal of clinical medicine·2026

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Feb 14, 2026

Porcine As a Training Module for Head and Neck Microvascular Reconstruction
07:43

Porcine As a Training Module for Head and Neck Microvascular Reconstruction

Published on: September 29, 2018

8.2K

Pediatric Head & Neck Free-Flap Reconstruction Outcomes: Score-Based Effectiveness Assessment.

Maciej Borowiec1, Dominika Lech2, Robert Maksymowicz2

  • 1Head and Neck Surgery Clinic for Children and Young Adults, Regional Specialized Children's Hospital in Olsztyn, 18a Żołnierska Str., 10-561 Olsztyn, Poland.

Journal of Clinical Medicine
|February 13, 2026
PubMed
Summary

Pediatric head and neck reconstruction using microsurgical free flaps is safe and effective across all ages. A comprehensive scoring system shows high functional recovery rates, exceeding simple flap survival metrics.

Keywords:
donor-site morbidityflap survivalfree flap reconstructionfunctional outcomeshead and neck surgerypediatric microsurgery

More Related Videos

Coronoid-Temporalis Pedicled Flap for Orbital Floor Defect Reconstruction
06:32

Coronoid-Temporalis Pedicled Flap for Orbital Floor Defect Reconstruction

Published on: December 5, 2025

708
A Pediatric Concussion Model in Mice: Closed Head Injury with Long-Term Disorders (CHILD)
07:01

A Pediatric Concussion Model in Mice: Closed Head Injury with Long-Term Disorders (CHILD)

Published on: February 7, 2025

918

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Feb 14, 2026

Porcine As a Training Module for Head and Neck Microvascular Reconstruction
07:43

Porcine As a Training Module for Head and Neck Microvascular Reconstruction

Published on: September 29, 2018

8.2K
Coronoid-Temporalis Pedicled Flap for Orbital Floor Defect Reconstruction
06:32

Coronoid-Temporalis Pedicled Flap for Orbital Floor Defect Reconstruction

Published on: December 5, 2025

708
A Pediatric Concussion Model in Mice: Closed Head Injury with Long-Term Disorders (CHILD)
07:01

A Pediatric Concussion Model in Mice: Closed Head Injury with Long-Term Disorders (CHILD)

Published on: February 7, 2025

918

Area of Science:

  • Plastic Surgery
  • Pediatric Surgery
  • Head and Neck Surgery

Background:

  • Microsurgical free-flap reconstruction is crucial for pediatric head and neck defects.
  • Existing outcome data are limited, focusing mainly on technical survival.
  • A standardized Treatment Effectiveness Score (TES) was developed to assess clinical effectiveness.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To evaluate the clinical effectiveness of microsurgical free-flap reconstruction in pediatric patients.
  • To assess functional recovery using a standardized Treatment Effectiveness Score.
  • To analyze the impact of patient age on outcomes.

Main Methods:

  • Retrospective review of 54 free-flap procedures in 46 pediatric patients (16 months-18 years).
  • Systematic assessment of recipient- and donor-site outcomes, swallowing, mastication, breathing, and mouth opening.
  • Analysis of age as a modifying variable for flap survival and treatment effectiveness.

Main Results:

  • Flap survival rate was 76%; mean TES was 89.7 in cases without flap loss.
  • Partial complications occurred in 37% of procedures; donor-site morbidity was 5.6%.
  • 80.4% of patients achieved full functional restoration; age did not significantly impact outcomes.

Conclusions:

  • Pediatric microsurgical reconstruction is safe and feasible across the age spectrum.
  • Composite outcome scoring (TES) offers a more comprehensive assessment than flap survival alone.
  • Standardized reporting frameworks are needed for future pediatric reconstruction studies.