↓ Skip to main content

Preservation of hearing following awake surgery via the retrosigmoid approach for vestibular schwannomas in eight consecutive patients

Overview of attention for article published in Acta Neurochirurgica, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
22 Mendeley
Title
Preservation of hearing following awake surgery via the retrosigmoid approach for vestibular schwannomas in eight consecutive patients
Published in
Acta Neurochirurgica, July 2017
DOI 10.1007/s00701-017-3235-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nobusada Shinoura, Akira Midorikawa, Kentaro Hiromitsu, Shoko Saito, Ryoji Yamada

Abstract

Hearing preservation in patients with vestibular schwannomas remains difficult by microsurgery or radiosurgery. In this study, awake surgery via the retrosigmoid approach was performed for vestibular schwannomas (volume, 11.6 ± 11.2 ml; range, 1.3-26.4 ml) in eight consecutive patients with preoperative quartering of pure tone audiometry (PTA) of 53 ± 27 dB. After surgery, hearing was preserved in seven patients and improved in one patient. The postoperative quartering PTA was 51 ± 21 dB. Serviceable hearing (class A + B + C) using the American Association of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery (AAO-HNS) classification was preserved in all patients. Preoperative useful hearing (AAO-HNS class A + B) was observed in three patients, and useful hearing was preserved in all three of these patients after surgery. In addition, useful facial nerve function (House-Blackmann Grade 1) was preserved in all patients. These results suggest that awake surgery for vestibular schwannomas is associated with low patient morbidity, including with respect to hearing and facial nerve function.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 22 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 4 18%
Researcher 3 14%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 14%
Student > Master 3 14%
Student > Bachelor 2 9%
Other 5 23%
Unknown 2 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 50%
Psychology 2 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 5%
Neuroscience 1 5%
Engineering 1 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 6 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 20 August 2017.
All research outputs
#13,326,556
of 22,988,380 outputs
Outputs from Acta Neurochirurgica
#1,051
of 1,934 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#154,700
of 313,816 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Acta Neurochirurgica
#7
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,988,380 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,934 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 313,816 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.