| Title |
A Comparative Study Between Endoscopic Middle Meatal Antrostomy and Caldwell-Luc Surgery in the Treatment of Chronic Maxillary Sinusitis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Indian Journal of Otolaryngology and Head & Neck Surgery, May 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12070-011-0262-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
K. Joe Jacob, Shibu George, S. Preethi, V. S. Arunraj |
| Abstract |
Functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS) has almost completely replaced the radical Caldwell-Luc approach. About 20 years after its origin of FESS a comparative study with Caldwell-Luc Surgery (C-L) definitely should be on cards to validate the previous results. To compare the effectiveness of endoscopic middle meatal antrostomy and Caldwell-Luc's surgery in the management of Chronic Maxillary Sinusitis. This is a prospective randomized comparative study based on the analysis of eighty patients who were diagnosed to have chronic, unilateral, maxillary sinusitis and underwent surgery, after a failed trial of conservative management. One year after surgery 44% of the C-L patients and 89% of the FESS patients reported distinct improvement of their symptoms. Both are effective in the management of chronic sinusitis. Endoscopic middle meatal antrostomy is superior to Caldwell-Luc in intraoperative and postoperative parameters. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 24 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 21% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 13% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 8% |
| Professor | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 3 | 13% |
| Unknown | 8 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 14 | 58% |
| Unknown | 10 | 42% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 23 July 2014.
All research outputs
#21,476,880
of 23,975,976 outputs
Outputs from Indian Journal of Otolaryngology and Head & Neck Surgery
#554
of 744 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#105,446
of 112,689 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Indian Journal of Otolaryngology and Head & Neck Surgery
#12
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,975,976 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 744 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 112,689 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.