↓ Skip to main content

Role of lumbar interspinous distraction on the neural elements

Overview of attention for article published in Neurosurgical Review, May 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
43 Mendeley
Title
Role of lumbar interspinous distraction on the neural elements
Published in
Neurosurgical Review, May 2012
DOI 10.1007/s10143-012-0394-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alex Alfieri, Roberto Gazzeri, Julian Prell, Christian Scheller, Jens Rachinger, Christian Strauss, Andreas Schwarz

Abstract

The interspinous distraction devices are used to treat variable pathologies ranging from facet syndrome, diskogenic low back pain, degenerative spinal stenosis, diskopathy, spondylolisthesis, and instability. The insertion of a posterior element with an interspinous device (ISD) is commonly judged responsive to a relative kyphosis of a lumbar segment with a moderate but persistent increase of the spinal canal and of the foraminal width and area, and without influence on low-grade spondylolisthesis. The consequence is the need of shared specific biomechanical concepts to give for each degenerative problem the right indication through a critical analysis of all available experimental and clinical biomechanical data. We reviewed systematically the available clinical and experimental data about kyphosis, enlargement of the spinal canal, distraction of the interspinous distance, increase of the neural foramina, ligamentous structures, load of the posterior annulus, intradiskal pressure, strength of the spinous processes, degeneration of the adjacent segment, complications, and cost-effectiveness of the ISD. The existing literature does not provide actual scientific evidence over the superiority of the ISD strategy, but most of the experimental and clinical data show a challenging potential. These considerations are applicable with different types of ISD with only few differences between the different categories. Despite--or because of--the low invasiveness of the surgical implantation of the ISD, this technique promises to play a major role in the future degenerative lumbar microsurgery. The main indications for ISD remain lumbar spinal stenoses and painful facet arthroses. A clear documented contraindication is the presence of an anterolisthesis. Nevertheless, the existing literature does not provide evidence of superiority of outcome and cost-effectiveness of the ISD strategy over laminectomy or other surgical procedures. At this time, the devices should be used in clinical randomized independent trials in order to obtain more information concerning the most advantageous optimal indication or, in selected cases, to treat tailored indications.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 43 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 6 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 14%
Researcher 5 12%
Student > Bachelor 4 9%
Professor 4 9%
Other 6 14%
Unknown 12 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 49%
Engineering 2 5%
Neuroscience 2 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 2%
Sports and Recreations 1 2%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 13 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 24 November 2016.
All research outputs
#6,911,928
of 22,664,644 outputs
Outputs from Neurosurgical Review
#93
of 614 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#48,696
of 163,461 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neurosurgical Review
#3
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,664,644 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 614 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 163,461 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.