| Title |
Transoral robotic thyroidectomy: a preclinical feasibility study using the da Vinci Xi platform
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Robotic Surgery, February 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11701-016-0661-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jonathon O. Russell, Salem I. Noureldine, Mai G. Al Khadem, Hamad A. Chaudhary, Andrew T. Day, Hoon Yub Kim, Ralph P. Tufano, Jeremy D. Richmon |
| Abstract |
Transoral thyroid surgery allows the surgeon to conceal incisions within the oral cavity without significantly increasing the amount of required dissection. TORT provides an ideal scarless, midline access to the thyroid gland and bilateral central neck compartments. This approach, however, presents multiple technical challenges. Herein, we present our experience using the latest generation robotic surgical system to accomplish transoral robotic thyroidectomy (TORT). In two human cadavers, the da Vinci Xi surgical system (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA, USA) was used to complete TORT. Total thyroidectomy and bilateral central neck dissection was successfully completed in both cadavers. The da Vinci Xi platform offered several technologic advantages over previous robotic generations including overhead docking, narrower arms, and improved range of motion allowing for improved execution of previously described TORT techniques. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 19 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 3 | 16% |
| United States | 3 | 16% |
| Saudi Arabia | 2 | 11% |
| Spain | 1 | 5% |
| Ecuador | 1 | 5% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 5% |
| Russia | 1 | 5% |
| India | 1 | 5% |
| Panama | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 5 | 26% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 13 | 68% |
| Scientists | 3 | 16% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 16% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 17 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 4 | 24% |
| Other | 3 | 18% |
| Professor | 2 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 6% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 2 | 12% |
| Unknown | 4 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 53% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 6% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 6% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 5 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 April 2017.
All research outputs
#2,435,858
of 24,228,883 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Robotic Surgery
#27
of 731 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#51,208
of 427,411 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Robotic Surgery
#4
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,228,883 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 731 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 427,411 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.