↓ Skip to main content

Management of aortic injury during minimally invasive lateral lumbar interbody fusion

Overview of attention for article published in European Spine Journal, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
20 Mendeley
Title
Management of aortic injury during minimally invasive lateral lumbar interbody fusion
Published in
European Spine Journal, May 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00586-018-5620-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael M. Safaee, Devin Zarkowsky, Charles M. Eichler, Murat Pekmezci, Aaron J. Clark

Abstract

Minimally invasive lateral approaches to the lumbar spine allow for interbody fusion with good visualization of the disk space, minimal blood loss, and decreased length of stay. Major neurologic, vascular, and visceral complications are rare with this approach; however, the steps in management for severe vascular injuries are not well defined. We present a case report of aortic injury during lateral interbody fusion and discuss the use of endovascular repair. This study is a case report of an intraoperative aortic injury. A 59-year-old male with ankylosing spondylitis suffered an acute L1 Chance fracture after mechanical fall. He was taken to the operating room for a T10-L4 posterior instrumented fusion followed by a minimally invasive L1-L2 lateral interbody fusion for anterior column support. During the discectomy, brisk arterial bleeding was encountered due to an aortic injury. The vascular surgery team expanded the incision in an attempt to control the bleeding but with limited success. The patient underwent intraoperative angiogram with placement of stent grafts at the level of the injury followed by completion of the interbody fusion. Despite the potentially catastrophic nature of this injury, the patient made a good recovery and was discharged home in stable condition with no new neurologic deficits. This case highlights the importance of immediate recognition and imaging of any potential vascular injury during minimally invasive lateral interbody fusion. Given the poor outcomes associated with attempted open repair, endovascular techniques provide a valuable tool for the treatment of these complex injuries with significantly less morbidity.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 20 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 25%
Other 3 15%
Student > Bachelor 3 15%
Lecturer 2 10%
Professor 1 5%
Other 3 15%
Unknown 3 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 65%
Unspecified 1 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 5%
Unknown 4 20%
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 07 May 2018.
All research outputs
#18,606,163
of 23,047,237 outputs
Outputs from European Spine Journal
#2,504
of 4,676 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#254,126
of 327,928 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Spine Journal
#35
of 98 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,047,237 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,676 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 327,928 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 98 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.