↓ Skip to main content

Sinonasal outcomes following endoscopic anterior skull base surgery with nasoseptal flap reconstruction: a prospective study

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Laryngology & Otology, March 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
33 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
42 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Sinonasal outcomes following endoscopic anterior skull base surgery with nasoseptal flap reconstruction: a prospective study
Published in
Journal of Laryngology & Otology, March 2015
DOI 10.1017/s002221511500047x
Pubmed ID
Authors

M Hanson, P M Patel, C Betz, S Olson, B Panizza, B Wallwork

Abstract

Objective: To assess nasal morbidity resulting from nasoseptal flap use in the repair of skull base defects in endoscopic anterior skull base surgery. Methods: Thirty-six patients awaiting endoscopic anterior skull base surgery were prospectively recruited. A nasoseptal flap was used for reconstruction in all cases. Patients were assessed pre-operatively and 90 days post-operatively via the Sino-Nasal Outcome Test 20 questionnaire and visual analogue scales for nasal obstruction, pain, secretions and smell; endoscopic examination findings and mucociliary clearance times were also recorded. Results: Sino-Nasal Outcome Test 20 questionnaire data and visual analogue scale scores for pain, smell and secretions showed no significant differences between pre- and post-operative outcomes, with visual analogue scale scores for nasal obstruction actually showing a significant improvement (p = 0.0007). A significant deterioration for both flap and non-flap sides was demonstrated post-operatively on endoscopic examination (p = 0.002 and p = 0.02 respectively). Conclusion: Whilst elevation of a nasoseptal flap in endoscopic surgery of the anterior skull base engendered significant clinical deterioration on examination post-operatively, quality of life outcomes showed that no such deterioration was subjectively experienced by the patient. In fact, there was significant nasal airway improvement following nasoseptal flap reconstruction.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 2%
Unknown 41 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 8 19%
Student > Postgraduate 5 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 10%
Student > Bachelor 3 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 7%
Other 8 19%
Unknown 11 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 55%
Neuroscience 4 10%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 2%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 10 24%
Attention Score in Context

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 04 March 2015.
All research outputs
#20,947,998
of 25,728,855 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Laryngology & Otology
#1,666
of 2,970 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#201,972
of 272,561 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Laryngology & Otology
#20
of 57 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,728,855 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,970 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.7. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% 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 272,561 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 57 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.