↓ Skip to main content

Rectus abdominis muscle innervation: an anatomical study with surgical implications in diep flap harvesting

Overview of attention for article published in Surgical and Radiologic Anatomy, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (63rd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
35 Mendeley
Title
Rectus abdominis muscle innervation: an anatomical study with surgical implications in diep flap harvesting
Published in
Surgical and Radiologic Anatomy, November 2017
DOI 10.1007/s00276-017-1944-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Carla Stecco, Gian Paolo Azzena, Veronica Macchi, Andrea Porzionato, Astrid Behr, Anna Rambaldo, Cesare Tiengo, Raffaele De Caro

Abstract

To improve the current knowledge of rectus abdominis innervation, so as to identify a safe area where the vascular pedicle should be dissected to reduce the risk of nerve damage during deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap harvesting. Ten abdominal wall dissections were performed. Perforating arteries were identified and classified into nerve-related perforators and non-nerve-related perforators depending on the presence of nerve branches crossing vessels. The width of rectus abdominis and the distance between perforators and lateral edge of rectus abdominis muscle were measured. In contralateral hemi-abdomen, full-thickness specimens were sampled for microscopical analysis. Nerves enter the rectus sheath piercing the lateral edge (60% of cases) or the posterolateral surface of the sheath (40% of cases). They enter the rectus abdominis muscle at a mean distance of 4.3 cm from the lateral margin of the sheath. Within rectus abdominis, nerves have a mean thickness of 200.3 µm and split into 2-4 sensitive and 2-4 muscular branches. Close relationship between muscular branches and deep inferior epigastric artery perforators were shown. The mean distance between nerve-related perforators and the lateral edge of the rectus abdominis was of 3.26 ± 0.88 cm. The mean distance between non-nerve-related perforators and the lateral edge of the rectus abdominis was of 6.26 ± 0.90 cm. To spare nerves and reduce donor-site complications, a perforator located beyond an imaginary line of 3.26 ± 0.88 cm far from the lateral edge of rectus abdominis muscle should be included in the DIEP flap.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 35 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 14%
Researcher 4 11%
Other 3 9%
Student > Bachelor 3 9%
Librarian 2 6%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 14 40%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 37%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 3%
Unspecified 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 16 46%
Attention Score in Context

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 01 March 2021.
All research outputs
#7,531,172
of 23,815,455 outputs
Outputs from Surgical and Radiologic Anatomy
#108
of 705 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#120,015
of 330,022 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Surgical and Radiologic Anatomy
#3
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,815,455 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 705 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 330,022 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 63% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.