↓ Skip to main content

Neck Dissection Technique Commonality and Variance: A Survey on Neck Dissection Technique Preferences among Head and Neck Oncologic Surgeons in the American Head and Neck Society

Overview of attention for article published in International Archives of Otorhinolaryngology, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
17 Mendeley
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.
Title
Neck Dissection Technique Commonality and Variance: A Survey on Neck Dissection Technique Preferences among Head and Neck Oncologic Surgeons in the American Head and Neck Society
Published in
International Archives of Otorhinolaryngology, September 2016
DOI 10.1055/s-0036-1592153
Pubmed ID
Authors

Shirin M. Hemmat, Steven J. Wang, William R. Ryan

Abstract

Introduction Neck dissection (ND) technique preferences are not well reported. Objective The objective of this study is to educate practitioners and trainees about surgical technique commonality and variance used by head and neck oncologic surgeons when performing a ND. Methods Online survey of surgeon members of the American Head and Neck Society (AHNS). Survey investigated respondents' demographic information, degree of surgical experience, ND technique preferences. Results In our study, 283 out of 1,010 (28%) AHNS surgeon members with a mean age of 50.3 years (range 32-77 years) completed surveys from 41 states and 24 countries. We found that 205 (72.4%) had completed a fellowship in head and neck surgical oncology. Also, 225 (79.5%) respondents reported completing more than 25 NDs per year. ND technique commonalities (>66% respondents) included: preserving level 5 (unless with suspicious lymph nodes (LN)), only excising the portion of sternocleidomastoid muscle involved with tumor, resecting lymphatic tissue en bloc, preservation of cervical sensory rootlets, not performing submandibular gland (SMG) transfer, placing one drain for unilateral selective NDs, and performing a ND after parotidectomy and thyroidectomy and before transcervical approaches to upper aerodigestive tract primary site. Variability existed in the sequence of LN levels excised, instrument preferences, criteria for drain removal, the timing of a ND with transoral upper aerodigestive tract primary site resections, and submandibular gland preservation. Results showed that 122 (43.1%) surgeons reported that they preserve the submandibular gland during the level 1b portion of a ND. Conclusions The commonalities and variances reported for the ND technique may help put individual preferences into context.

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 %
Nigeria 1 6%
Unknown 16 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 12%
Student > Postgraduate 2 12%
Student > Master 2 12%
Professor 2 12%
Other 1 6%
Other 3 18%
Unknown 5 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 41%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 6%
Unspecified 1 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 6%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 6 35%
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 23 January 2017.
All research outputs
#20,413,129
of 22,963,381 outputs
Outputs from International Archives of Otorhinolaryngology
#307
of 646 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#293,398
of 336,195 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Archives of Otorhinolaryngology
#3
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,963,381 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 646 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.6. 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 336,195 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 11 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.