Operative Briefs

Surgical case series, wound closure protocols, and biomatrix performance analyses from the field.

Vol. Ongoing / Peer Reviewed
Lead Surgical Brief

Complex Closure Techniques in High-Tension Wound Environments: A Case Series

Peer-reviewed observations from 42 reconstructive cases, evaluating layered closure strategy against tension gradient and matrix integration outcomes.

Annotated surgical brief documentation
Featured Brief · Vol. 12 14 min read
Topic Taxonomy 04 Categories

  • Soft Tissue Reconstruction

    01

    Repair strategies, flap coverage, and layered closure case reviews.

  • Procedural Outcomes

    02

    Quantitative follow-up data and complication rate analyses across case cohorts.

  • Biomatrix Utility

    03

    Performance benchmarks and integration findings for biologic scaffold materials.

  • Complex Closure Techniques

    04

    Step-by-step technique breakdowns for high-complexity wound presentations.

Contributing surgeon reviewing an operative brief

Contributing Editor, Reconstructive Microsurgery

About This Series

Written by Surgeons, Reviewed for Practice

Each brief in this series is authored by credentialed reconstructive and plastic surgeons with active operative practices. Submissions are reviewed for clinical accuracy, procedural reproducibility, and evidence-based outcomes before publication.

Our standard is simple. If it cannot be replicated in the OR, it does not belong on this page.
Editorial Board Statement

Credentials Contributors hold board certifications including FACS, FRCS, and fellowship training in reconstructive microsurgery and wound care.

a stack of papers sitting on top of a white counter

Download Clinical Operative Summaries

Access our curated PDF library of operative brief summaries, formatted for quick pre-operative reference and continuing education.

Provided at no cost to credentialed surgical professionals. Your information is never shared.

Finally, a journal that bridges laboratory science and the operating room. The clinical case observations are immediately applicable to daily practice.
RST's outcome summaries save me hours of literature review. The data is curated, rigorous, and presented in a format surgeons can actually use.
The Conexeu scaffold review gave our department the evidence we needed to update our tissue matrix protocol with confidence.
Swipe to read more
Editorial Leadership

Our Board of Clinical Contributors

Regenerative Surgery Today is shaped by practicing surgeons, not science writers. Our contributors bring first-hand operative expertise to every review.

Dr. Marcus Elden, Editor-in-Chief
01
Editor-in-Chief

Dr. Marcus Elden, MD, FACS

Board-certified plastic and reconstructive surgeon with more than twenty years of operative experience across complex soft tissue reconstruction. Fellowship-trained in microsurgery, Dr. Elden leads editorial direction with an emphasis on operative reproducibility, patient-reported outcomes, and the disciplined evaluation of emerging regenerative techniques.

ABPS Board-Certified Microsurgery Fellowship FACS
Affiliation · Johns Hopkins Department of Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery
Dr. Priya Ashcroft, Senior Clinical Editor
02
Senior Clinical Editor

Dr. Priya Ashcroft, MD, PhD

A trauma surgery specialist and outcomes researcher, Dr. Ashcroft oversees the journal's clinical review pipeline. Her published work in JPRAS and the Annals of Surgery has advanced protocols for extremity salvage and delayed reconstruction, and she brings a rigorous methodological lens to every submission crossing the editorial desk.

Trauma Surgery Outcomes Research JPRAS Contributor
Affiliation · University of Michigan Trauma Reconstructive Services
Dr. Aleksander Weiss, Biomaterials Reviewer
03
Biomaterials Reviewer

Dr. Aleksander Weiss, MD, DPhil

An academic reconstructive surgeon with a doctoral background in tissue engineering, Dr. Weiss evaluates scaffold performance, acellular matrix behavior, and next-generation regenerative substrates. His reviews focus on translating bench-side biomaterial data into surgically defensible operative decisions.

Tissue Engineering Scaffold Research Oxford DPhil
Affiliation · Radcliffe Department of Surgical Sciences, Oxford

Contributing surgeons shape the standard of evidence we publish.

Join as a Contributor
Editorial Submissions Vol. XII

Contribute to the Surgical Record

Submit a clinical case observation, surgical review, or technique report. Our editorial board reviews all submissions against peer-review standards.

Review Cycle
6-8 weeks
Acceptance
Rolling
Submit a Manuscript Subscribe to the Journal

Double-blind peer review. No submission fees. ISSN registered.

Common Questions

Everything You Need to Know

For surgeons evaluating our editorial standards, submission workflow, and access model, the answers below address the questions we hear most often from department chairs, residents, and practicing specialists.

01

Is Regenerative Surgery Today peer-reviewed?

Yes. All surgical reviews and clinical observations undergo double-blind peer review by board-certified specialists across plastic, reconstructive, and trauma disciplines before publication.

02

How do I submit a manuscript or case report?

Manuscripts are received through our online submission portal. Our editorial board issues a preliminary assessment within 10 business days, followed by full peer review for accepted submissions.

03

Are articles CME-accredited?

Selected reviews carry CME credit through our accreditation partner. Eligible articles are clearly marked at the top of each publication, with claim instructions provided at the end of the piece.

04

Is access free for subscribers?

Digital access is free for registered surgical practitioners. Institutional licensing is available for residency programs, hospital systems, and academic medical centers seeking broader distribution.

05

Can I share articles with my department?

Institutional subscribers may share articles under a departmental license. Contact our licensing team for group access options tailored to teaching services and multi-site practices.

06

How does RST evaluate regenerative products like tissue scaffolds?

All product evaluations are editorially independent and grounded in peer-reviewed outcome data alongside contributor clinical experience. Commercial relationships are disclosed in-line with each evaluation.

Still have a question about editorial standards or institutional access?

Contact the Editorial Board
Editorial Office

Reach Our Editorial Team

Correspondence regarding submissions, peer review, and editorial policy is handled by our New York office. We welcome inquiries from practicing surgeons, researchers, and academic institutions.

Submission Inquiry

For formal manuscript submissions, please use our submissions portal.