You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Two-level septocolumellar suture technique for correction of septal caudal dislocation
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology, November 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.bjorl.2015.06.009 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Nevzat Demirbilek, Cenk Evren, Mustafa Suphi Elbistanlı, Uzay Altun, Selda Sarikaya Günay |
| Abstract |
Caudal septal dislocation is a respiratory and cosmetic problem. The correction of caudal septal dislocation is a challenging issue. Although different modalities have been described for the treatment, it is still controversial. This study aims to describe a two-level suture technique which can be used to correct and stabilize the septum in the columellar pocket. The caudal septum was fixed to the nasal spine with suturing, and an anterior columellar pocket was formed. Two septocolumellar sutures including superior and inferior were performed to correct the dislocated caudal septum and to increase the stability of caudal septum in the columellar pocket. Anterior rhinoscopy showed no recurrent deviation or dislocation in our patients. Our suture technique is an effective and easy-to-use method to correct the caudal septal dislocation. It can also be used to increase the stability of corrected septum by other techniques. A two-level suture technique increases the success of correction and reduces the risk of postoperative septal caudal luxation, stabilizing the superior portion of the caudal septum, in particular. Therefore, it would reduce the rate of redo surgeries. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 7 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 7 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Professor > Associate Professor | 1 | 14% |
| Researcher | 1 | 14% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 1 | 14% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 3 | 43% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 57% |
| Unknown | 3 | 43% |
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 29 November 2015.
All research outputs
#22,758,309
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology
#574
of 726 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#253,977
of 296,925 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology
#135
of 156 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 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 726 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. 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 296,925 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 156 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.