| Title |
Type V osteogenesis imperfecta undergoing surgical correction for scoliosis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Spine Journal, February 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00586-018-5465-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Morgan Jones, Lee Breakwell, Ashley Cole, Paul Arundel, Nick Bishop |
| Abstract |
The objective of this article is to report a case of type V osteogenesis imperfecta (OI) undergoing posterior instrumented fusion for scoliosis. Type V OI is a moderately severe dysplasia causing primary defects in endochondral bone ossification or mineralisation. It is characterised by hyperplastic callus (HPC) formation, interosseous membrane calcifications, poor bone quality and spinal deformities including scoliosis. Data on the surgical management of spinal deformities in this patient group are lacking. A 16-year-old patient with a confirmed diagnosis of type V OI presented with a progressive scoliosis. The patient underwent a T3-L4 posterior instrumented correction and fusion utilising pedicle screws, pedicle hooks and sub-laminar wiring. At 4 months after surgery, the pedicle hooks pulled out and required partial metalwork removal after CT scanning confirmed bony union and no evidence of HPC formation. The patient was successfully discharged with satisfactory correction, confirmed bony union, no neurologic complication and absence of any hyperplastic callus formation. Type V OI patients requiring surgical intervention for scoliosis correction can safely undergo posterior instrumented fusion using sublaminar wiring and pedicle hook/screw constructs without apparent risk of HPC formation around neural elements. Surgery in this patient group remains challenging due to the associated poor bone quality. V. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 15 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unspecified | 6 | 40% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 1 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 3 | 20% |
| Unknown | 2 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unspecified | 6 | 40% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 33% |
| Materials Science | 1 | 7% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 2 | 13% |
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 02 March 2018.
All research outputs
#20,468,008
of 23,026,672 outputs
Outputs from European Spine Journal
#3,688
of 4,669 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#292,329
of 330,823 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Spine Journal
#82
of 87 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,026,672 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 4,669 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. 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 330,823 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 87 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.