↓ Skip to main content

The use of bone anchors for autologous flap fixation in perineal reconstruction: a case report

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Surgical Case Reports, July 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
11 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
The use of bone anchors for autologous flap fixation in perineal reconstruction: a case report
Published in
Journal of Surgical Case Reports, July 2013
DOI 10.1093/jscr/rjt063
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

The purpose of this case report is to demonstrate the use of bone anchors with an autologous flap in perineal reconstruction. This technique has not been reported before. A 64-year-old female presented to our office with a chief complaint of perineal hernia 1.5 years after abdominoperineal resection. She had a history of recurrent rectal cancer for which she received chemotherapy, radiation and surgery. To repair the hernia, a standard vertical rectus abdominismyocutaneous was harvested and de-epithelialized. It was secured into place in the pelvis utilizing several bone anchors. Mesh was used to repair the donor site defect. At 18 month follow-up, there was good healing of all the wounds and no recurrence of the hernia. She was pain free and able to resume her activities of daily living. Bone anchor fixation is a viable technique for fixation of autologous flaps in perineal reconstruction.

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 11 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 11 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 4 36%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 18%
Professor > Associate Professor 1 9%
Unknown 4 36%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 64%
Engineering 1 9%
Unknown 3 27%
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 31 July 2013.
All research outputs
#17,691,546
of 22,715,151 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Surgical Case Reports
#630
of 1,847 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#142,445
of 198,188 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Surgical Case Reports
#4
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,715,151 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,847 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.7. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% 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 198,188 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.