↓ Skip to main content

Long-Term Follow-Up after Phrenic Nerve Reconstruction for Diaphragmatic Paralysis: A Review of 180 Patients

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Reconstructive Microsurgery, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#1 of 758)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
11 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
56 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.
Article details
Title
Long-Term Follow-Up after Phrenic Nerve Reconstruction for Diaphragmatic Paralysis: A Review of 180 Patients
Published in
Journal of Reconstructive Microsurgery, September 2016
DOI 10.1055/s-0036-1588018
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Background Phrenic nerve reconstruction has been evaluated as a method of restoring functional activity and may be an effective alternative to diaphragm plication. Longer follow-up and a larger cohort for analysis are necessary to confirm the efficacy of this procedure for diaphragmatic paralysis. Methods A total of 180 patients treated with phrenic nerve reconstruction for chronic diaphragmatic paralysis were followed for a median 2.7 years. Assessment parameters included: 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) physical functioning survey, spirometry, chest fluoroscopy, electrodiagnostic evaluation, a five-item questionnaire to assess specific functional issues, and overall patient-reported outcome. Results Overall, 134 males and 46 females with an average age of 56 years (range: 10-79 years) were treated. Mean baseline percent predicted values for forced expiratory volume in 1 second, forced vital capacity, vital capacity, and total lung capacity, were 61, 63, 67, and 75%, respectively. The corresponding percent improvements in percent predicted values were: 11, 6, 9, and 13% (p ≤ 0.01; ≤ 0.01; ≤ 0.05; ≤ 0.01). Mean preoperative SF-36 physical functioning survey scores were 39%, and an improvement to 65% was demonstrated following surgery (p ≤ 0.0001). Nerve conduction latency, improved by an average 23% (p ≤ 0.005), and there was a corresponding 125% increase in diaphragm motor amplitude (p ≤ 0.0001). A total of 89% of patients reported an overall improvement in breathing function. Conclusion Long-term assessment of phrenic nerve reconstruction for diaphragmatic paralysis indicates functional correction and symptomatic relief.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
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 demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 56 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 9%
Other 3 5%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 5%
Student > Bachelor 2 4%
Student > Postgraduate 2 4%
Other 4 7%
Unknown 37 66%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 7 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 11%
Neuroscience 3 5%
Computer Science 1 2%
Unknown 39 70%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 79. 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 13 December 2019.
All research outputs
#688,660
of 34,569,529 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Reconstructive Microsurgery
#1
of 758 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,585
of 334,672 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Reconstructive Microsurgery
#1
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,569,529 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 758 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 334,672 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them