| Title |
Bone SPECT/CT in the postoperative spine: a focus on spinal fusion
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, July 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00259-017-3765-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Khulood Al-Riyami, Gopinath Gnanasegaran, Tim Van den Wyngaert, Jamshed Bomanji |
| Abstract |
Low back pain is a global problem affecting one in 10 people. The management of low back pain varies from conservative to more invasive methods with a spectacular increase in the number of patients undergoing spinal fusion surgery during the last decade. Conventional radiological and radionuclide studies are often used in the assessment of persistent or recurring pain after spinal surgery with several advantages and limitations related to each technique. This article reviews the key contribution of integrated bone SPECT/CT in evaluating patients with persistent or recurring pain after spinal surgery, focusing on spinal fusion. Current literature supports the use of bone SPECT/CT as an adjunct imaging modality and problem-solving tool in evaluating patients with suspicion of pseudarthrosis, adjacent segment degeneration, and hardware failure. The role of bone SPECT/CT in post-operative orthopaedic scenarios is evolving, and this review highlights the need for further research on the role of bone SPECT/CT in these patients. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 | 1 | 33% |
| Saudi Arabia | 1 | 33% |
| France | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 67% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 55 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 7 | 13% |
| Researcher | 7 | 13% |
| Other | 6 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 5 | 9% |
| Unknown | 23 | 42% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 20 | 36% |
| Engineering | 3 | 5% |
| Sports and Recreations | 2 | 4% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 2 | 4% |
| Unknown | 25 | 45% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 04 June 2018.
All research outputs
#7,259,087
of 23,806,312 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging
#881
of 3,083 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#110,875
of 314,548 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging
#13
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,806,312 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,083 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% 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 314,548 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 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 72% of its contemporaries.