↓ Skip to main content
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (54th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
3 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
Quantitative Anatomic Comparison of the Extreme Lateral Transodontoid vs Extreme Medial Endoscopic Endonasal Approaches to the Jugular Foramen and Craniovertebral Junction
Published in
Operative Neurosurgery, August 2022
DOI 10.1227/ons.0000000000000350
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Large, destructive intracranial and extracranial lesions at the jugular foramen (JF) and anterior craniovertebral junction (CVJ) are among the most challenging lesions to resect. To compare the extreme lateral transodontoid approach (ELTOA) with the extreme medial endoscopic endonasal approach (EMEEA) to determine the most effective surgical approach to the JF and CVJ. Seven formalin-fixed cadaveric heads were dissected. Using neuronavigation, we quantitatively measured and compared the exposure of the intracranial and extracranial neurovascular structures, the drilled area of the clivus and the C1 vertebra, and the area of exposure of the brainstem. The mean total drilled area of the clivus was greater with the EMEEA than with the ELTOA (1043.5 vs 909.4 mm2, P = .02). The EMEEA provided a longer exposure of the extracranial cranial nerves (CNs) IX, X, and XI compared with the ELTOA (cranial nerve [CN] IX: 18.8 vs 12.0 mm, P = .01; CN X: 19.2 vs 10.4 mm, P = .003; and CN XI, 18.1 vs 11.9 mm, P = .04). The EMEEA, compared with the ELTOA, provided a significantly greater area of exposure of the contralateral ventromedial medulla (289.5 vs 80.9 mm2, P < .001) and pons (237.5 vs 86.2 mm2, P = .005) but less area of exposure of the ipsilateral dorsolateral medulla (51.5 vs 205.8 mm2, P = .008). The EMEEA and ELTOA provide optimal exposures to different aspects of the CVJ and JF. A combination of these approaches can compensate for their disadvantages and achieve significant exposure.

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 profiles of 3 X users 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 3 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 3 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Professor > Associate Professor 1 33%
Lecturer 1 33%
Unknown 1 33%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 2 67%
Unknown 1 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 28 October 2022.
All research outputs
#14,076,260
of 22,994,508 outputs
Outputs from Operative Neurosurgery
#837
of 1,445 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#190,750
of 430,595 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Operative Neurosurgery
#34
of 52 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,994,508 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,445 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% 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 430,595 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 54% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 52 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.