| Title |
MRI visible Fe3O4 polypropylene mesh: 3D reconstruction of spatial relation to bony pelvis and neurovascular structures
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Urogynecology Journal & Pelvic Floor Dysfunction, January 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00192-017-3263-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Luyun Chen, Florian Lenz, Céline D. Alt, Christof Sohn, John O. De Lancey, Kerstin A. Brocker |
| Abstract |
To demonstrate mesh magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) visibility in living women, the feasibility of reconstructing the full mesh course in 3D, and to document its spatial relationship to pelvic anatomical structures. This is a proof of concept study of three patients from a prospective multi-center trial evaluating women with anterior vaginal mesh repair using a MRI-visible Fe3O4 polypropylene implant for pelvic floor reconstruction. High-resolution sagittal T2-weighted (T2w) sequences, transverse T1-weighted (T1w) FLASH 2D, and transverse T1w FLASH 3D sequences were performed to evaluate Fe3O4 polypropylene mesh MRI visibility and overall post-surgical pelvic anatomy 3 months after reconstructive surgery. Full mesh course in addition to important pelvic structures were reconstructed using the 3D Slicer® software program based on T1w and T2w MRI. Three women with POP-Q grade III cystoceles were successfully treated with a partially absorbable MRI-visible anterior vaginal mesh with six fixation arms and showed no recurrent cystocele at the 3-month follow-up examination. The course of mesh in the pelvis was visible on MRI in all three women. The mesh body and arms could be reconstructed allowing visualization of the full course of the mesh in relationship to important pelvic structures such as the obturator or pudendal vessel nerve bundles in 3D. The use of MRI-visible Fe3O4 polypropylene meshes in combination with post-surgical 3D reconstruction of the mesh and adjacent structures is feasible suggesting that it might be a useful tool for evaluating mesh complications more precisely and a valuable interactive feedback tool for surgeons and mesh design engineers. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 36 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 11% |
| Researcher | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 6 | 17% |
| Unknown | 15 | 42% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 28% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 8% |
| Engineering | 3 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 16 | 44% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 28 August 2018.
All research outputs
#16,722,913
of 25,377,790 outputs
Outputs from International Urogynecology Journal & Pelvic Floor Dysfunction
#1,846
of 2,900 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#255,442
of 422,427 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Urogynecology Journal & Pelvic Floor Dysfunction
#24
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,377,790 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,900 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% 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 422,427 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.