↓ Skip to main content

Effect of Cricoarytenoid Joint Preservation and Suture Tension on Arytenoid Lateralization

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of the American Animal Hospital Association, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
34 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
Effect of Cricoarytenoid Joint Preservation and Suture Tension on Arytenoid Lateralization
Published in
Journal of the American Animal Hospital Association, August 2017
DOI 10.5326/jaaha-ms-6460
Pubmed ID
Authors

Elizabeth Davis, Brenda Salinardi, Jason Spina, Claire Sharp

Abstract

The objective of this experimental study was to evaluate the effects of cricoarytenoid (CA) joint preservation versus disarticulation on rima glottidis (RG) area with the epiglottis open and closed under both low and high suture tension. Canine cadaver larynges were used. A unilateral arytenoid lateralization (UAL) was performed with low or high suture tension and with the CA joint preserved or disarticulated. Rima glottidis area was measured with the epiglottis in an open and closed position. Results indicated that RG area was increased over baseline when UAL was performed with both low and high suture tension when the epiglottis was in an open position. High suture tension resulted in a greater increase in RG area compared to low suture tension, both when the CA was preserved and disarticulated. There was no difference in RG area when the CA was disarticulated versus preserved at either suture tension. Rima glottidis area was not significantly increased over baseline when the epiglottis was in a closed position except in the group with CA joint preservation and high suture tension. Although this study suggests that UAL can be performed with or without CA disarticulation, further studies are warranted before UAL without CA disarticulation can be recommended clinically.

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.
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 readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 34 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 10 29%
Student > Postgraduate 7 21%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 6%
Professor 2 6%
Other 5 15%
Unknown 5 15%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 24 71%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 3 9%
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 29 August 2017.
All research outputs
#22,764,772
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Journal of the American Animal Hospital Association
#396
of 658 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#287,140
of 327,653 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of the American Animal Hospital Association
#11
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 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 658 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. 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 327,653 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 15 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.