↓ Skip to main content

Cerebrospinal Fluid Flow Impedance is Elevated in Type I Chiari Malformation

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Biomechanical Engineering, February 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
52 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
Cerebrospinal Fluid Flow Impedance is Elevated in Type I Chiari Malformation
Published in
Journal of Biomechanical Engineering, February 2014
DOI 10.1115/1.4026316
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Diagnosis of Type I Chiari malformation (CMI) is difficult because the most commonly used diagnostic criterion, cerebellar tonsillar herniation (CTH) greater than 3-5 mm past the foramen magnum, has been found to have little correlation with patient symptom severity. Thus, there is a need to identify new objective measurement(s) to help quantify CMI severity. This study investigated longitudinal impedance (LI) as a parameter to assess CMI in terms of impedance to cerebrospinal fluid motion near the craniovertebral junction. LI was assessed in CMI patients (N = 15) and age-matched healthy controls (N = 8) using computational fluid dynamics based on subject-specific magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) measurements of the cervical spinal subarachnoid space. In addition, CTH was measured for each subject. Mean LI in the CMI group (551 ± 66 dyn/cm5) was significantly higher than in controls (220 ± 17 dyn/cm5, p < 0.001). Mean CTH in the CMI group was 9.0 ± 1.1 mm compared to -0.4 ± 0.5 mm in controls. Regression analysis of LI versus CTH found a weak relationship (R2 = 0.46, p < 0.001), demonstrating that CTH was not a good indicator of the impedance to CSF motion caused by cerebellar herniation. These results showed that CSF flow impedance was elevated in CMI patients and that LI provides different information than a standard CTH measurement. Further research is necessary to determine if LI can be useful in CMI patient diagnosis.

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.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 52 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 %
United States 2 4%
Unknown 50 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 12%
Student > Bachelor 5 10%
Other 4 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 8%
Other 14 27%
Unknown 15 29%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 27%
Engineering 7 13%
Neuroscience 3 6%
Mathematics 2 4%
Environmental Science 1 2%
Other 5 10%
Unknown 20 38%
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 11 January 2014.
All research outputs
#20,265,771
of 22,796,179 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Biomechanical Engineering
#1,044
of 1,165 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#265,882
of 307,449 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Biomechanical Engineering
#8
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,796,179 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 1,165 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.6. 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 307,449 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.