| Title |
Recurrent respiratory papillomatosis: an overview of current thinking and treatment
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, November 2007
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00405-007-0546-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Peter Goon, Chris Sonnex, Piyush Jani, Margaret Stanley, Holger Sudhoff |
| Abstract |
Human papillomaviruses (HPV) infection in benign laryngeal papillomas is well established. The vast majority of recurrent respiratory papillomatosis lesions are due to HPV types 6 and 11. Human papillomaviruses are small non-enveloped viruses (>8 kb), that replicate within the nuclei of infected host cells. Infected host basal cell keratinocytes and papillomas arise from the disordered proliferation of these differentiating keratinocytes. Surgical debulking of papillomas is currently the treatment of choice; newer surgical approaches utilizing microdebriders are replacing laser ablation. Surgery aims to secure an adequate airway and improve and maintain an acceptable quality of voice. Adjuvant treatments currently used include cidofovir, indole-3-carbinol, ribavirin, mumps vaccine, and photodynamic therapy. The recent licensing of prophylactic HPV vaccines is a most interesting development. The low incidence of RRP does pose significant problems in recruitment of sufficient numbers to show statistical significance. Large multi-centre collaborative clinical trials are therefore required. Even so, sufficient clinical follow-up data would take several years. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 120 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Ecuador | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 118 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 18 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 17 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 15 | 13% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 14 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 8% |
| Other | 19 | 16% |
| Unknown | 28 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 60 | 50% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 7 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 6% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 5 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 7 | 6% |
| Unknown | 31 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 17 November 2015.
All research outputs
#4,709,809
of 22,846,662 outputs
Outputs from European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology
#217
of 3,073 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,674
of 156,351 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology
#2
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,846,662 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 76th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,073 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its peers.
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 156,351 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 8 of them.