| Title |
Intranasal endoscopic prelacrimal recess approach for maxillary sinus inverted papilloma
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, August 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00405-018-5078-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Qian-Qian Yu, Ge Guan, Nian-Kai Zhang, Xiao-Wen Zhang, Yan Jiang, Yuan-Yuan Lian, Ting-Ting Liu, Xiao-Dan Jiang, Na Li |
| Abstract |
This study aims to determine the indications and effectiveness of transnasal endoscopic prelacrimal recess approach (PLRA) in patients with maxillary sinus inverted papilloma (IP). We retrospectively analyzed 71 patients treated in our institution for maxillary sinus IP between August 2008 and April 2015. 20 patients underwent endoscopic surgery via PLRA. All the patients who had postoperative follow-up for 3 years were enrolled. Demographic data, surgical technique, location of IP attachment, intra- and postoperative complications, follow-up duration and recurrence were recorded. The outpatient follow-up period was 3-10 years after surgery. Recurrence of IP was seen in 6 (8.5%) of 71 patients, including 1 patient in the PLRA group. The recurrence rate was 5% in the PLRA group. Six of 71 patients experienced postoperative complications, but none was observed in the PLRA group. Transnasal endoscopic PLRA is a minimally invasive, safe and effective method for maxillary sinus IP. The indication for PLRA is tumor pedicle located on the antero-inferior or infero-lateral wall or at multiple attachment sites of the maxillary sinus. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 33 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 15% |
| Unspecified | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 9% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Researcher | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 6 | 18% |
| Unknown | 12 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 16 | 48% |
| Unspecified | 3 | 9% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 12 | 36% |
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 August 2018.
All research outputs
#17,986,372
of 23,099,576 outputs
Outputs from European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology
#1,511
of 3,125 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#237,618
of 330,419 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology
#15
of 37 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,099,576 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,125 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% 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 330,419 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 37 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.