↓ Skip to main content

Diagnosis of long head of biceps tendinopathy in rotator cuff tear patients: correlation of imaging and arthroscopy data

Overview of attention for article published in International Orthopaedics, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (53rd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
51 Mendeley
Title
Diagnosis of long head of biceps tendinopathy in rotator cuff tear patients: correlation of imaging and arthroscopy data
Published in
International Orthopaedics, August 2017
DOI 10.1007/s00264-017-3616-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Morgane Rol, Luc Favard, Julien Berhouet

Abstract

The goal of this prospective study was to assess the reliability of pre-operative cross-sectional imaging for the diagnosis of long head of biceps (LHB) tendinopathy in patients with a rotator cuff tear. Cross-sectional imaging with MRI or CT arthrography data from 25 patients operated upon because of a rotator cuff tear between 1 October 2015 and 1 April 2016 was analysed by one experienced orthopaedic surgeon, one experienced radiologist and one orthopaedic resident. The analysis consisted of determining whether the LHB was present, the extrinsic tendon abnormalities (dislocation, tendon coverage) and intrinsic abnormalities (fraying, inflammation, degeneration). These findings were then compared to intra-operative arthroscopy findings, which were used as the benchmark. The interobserver correlation between the three different examiners for the cross-sectional imaging analysis as well as the correlation between the imaging and arthroscopy data were determined. The correlation between the imaging and arthroscopy data was the highest (80%) for the determination of LHB dislocation from the bicipital groove. The other diagnostic elements (subluxation, coverage and tendon degeneration) were difficult to discern with preoperative imaging, and correlated poorly with the arthroscopy findings (45% to 65%). The interobserver correlation was moderate to strong for the diagnosis of extrinsic tendon abnormalities. It was low to moderate for intrinsic abnormalities. Except for LHB dislocation, pre-operative imaging is not sufficient to make a reliable diagnosis of LHB tendinopathy. Arthroscopy remains the gold standard for the management of LHB tendinopathy, as diagnosed intra-operatively.

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 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 51 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 8 16%
Student > Master 6 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 10%
Student > Bachelor 5 10%
Researcher 3 6%
Other 12 24%
Unknown 12 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 37%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 14%
Engineering 3 6%
Sports and Recreations 2 4%
Unspecified 1 2%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 18 35%
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 08 September 2017.
All research outputs
#12,934,638
of 22,999,744 outputs
Outputs from International Orthopaedics
#744
of 1,456 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#147,593
of 316,647 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Orthopaedics
#10
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,999,744 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,456 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% 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 316,647 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 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 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 64% of its contemporaries.