↓ Skip to main content

Lamb larynx model for training in endoscopic and CO2 laser-assisted surgeries for benign laryngotracheal obstructions

Overview of attention for article published in European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
17 Mendeley
Title
Lamb larynx model for training in endoscopic and CO2 laser-assisted surgeries for benign laryngotracheal obstructions
Published in
European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, June 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00405-018-5011-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

François Gorostidi, Pauline Vinckenbosch, Karma Lambercy, Kishore Sandu

Abstract

With adequate indication and meticulous execution, endoscopic procedures can efficiently treat a subset of adult and pediatric benign laryngotracheal stenosis and obstructions, but these procedures are precise and very demanding. The difference between a successful and a failed surgery, with potentially debilitating side effects, resides in small details. The learning curve is long and very few centers worldwide have a sufficient case load making adequate training difficult. While indications and concepts of endoscopic procedures can be learned in books and by observing trained colleagues, the dexterity and the precise realization need to be practiced, ideally not initially on patients. We describe here the lamb model system for the initial training in such procedures. We provide a step-by-step guide for endoscopic approaches intended to treat pathologies such as laryngomalacia, bilateral vocal fold paralysis, posterior glottic stenosis, and laryngotracheal clefts. The lamb model system does not pose ethical issues, and it is easy to obtain and to handle. It was used during an international training course for laryngotracheal stenosis by novice and advanced airway surgeons. It was unanimously judged as relevant and useful by the participants.

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 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 > Bachelor 2 12%
Researcher 2 12%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 12%
Student > Master 1 6%
Unspecified 1 6%
Other 2 12%
Unknown 7 41%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 4 24%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 12%
Unspecified 1 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 6%
Engineering 1 6%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 8 47%
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 06 June 2018.
All research outputs
#20,520,426
of 23,088,369 outputs
Outputs from European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology
#2,062
of 3,122 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#289,413
of 329,877 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology
#27
of 41 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,088,369 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 3,122 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 329,877 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 41 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.