| Title |
Decision making in dissection range of temporal bone: refinements to enlarged translabyrinthine approach
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, May 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00405-015-3639-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Zheng Jie Zhu, Wei Dong Zhu, Hong Sai Chen, Zhao Yan Wang, Hao Wu |
| Abstract |
The aim of the study was to describe the refinements to the classic enlarged translabyrinthine approach (ETLA) by modifying the bony dissection range of temporal bone and to analyze the main outcomes achieved in a series of vestibular schwannoma (VS) cases submitted to microsurgery by ETLA. This was a retrospective study of 382 patients who underwent VS surgical removal via ETLA between January 2001 and December 2012. Among those cases, 332 were via classic ETLA, while 28 cases were via ETLA with blind sac technique and middle ear eradication and 22 via transotic approach. Total tumor removal was achieved in 368 cases, whereas near total removal in 11 patients and subtotal in 3 patients. In cases of large VS (>3 cm) via classic ETLA, good short-term and long-term facial nerve function (HB I-II) was gained in 27.8 % (32/115) and 42.6 % (49/115) cases, respectively, meanwhile in VS operated via blind sac technique, good short-term (p = 0.048) and long-term (p = 0.044) facial nerve function was reached in 44.0 % (22/50) and 60.0 % (30/50) cases, respectively. Postoperative facial nerve function was proved to be better in modified ETLA group. CSF leakage occurred in 16 (4.2 %) patients via classic ETLA. In 115 cases of large VS (>3 cm), postoperative CSF leakage occurred in 10 (8.7 %) patients. Whereas in 50 cases via blind sac technique, none developed CSF leakage (p = 0.03). The incidence of CSF leakage was lower in modified ETLA group. Our refinements to classic ETLA by changing the temporal bone resection range provide a wide surgical field, well prevention of CSF leakage and preservation of facial nerve function in large VS. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 17 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 5 | 29% |
| Researcher | 3 | 18% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 6% |
| Librarian | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 2 | 12% |
| Unknown | 3 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 29% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 12% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 6% |
| Mathematics | 1 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 6 | 35% |
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 May 2015.
All research outputs
#20,274,720
of 22,807,037 outputs
Outputs from European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology
#2,023
of 3,068 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#224,166
of 267,780 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology
#22
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,807,037 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 3,068 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. 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 267,780 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 46 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.