↓ Skip to main content

Laser-guided transtibial technique improved single-bundle reconstruction of anterior cruciate ligament

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
19 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.
Title
Laser-guided transtibial technique improved single-bundle reconstruction of anterior cruciate ligament
Published in
Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research, July 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13018-018-0878-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Zhen Yuan, Ning Bian, Yuefeng Hao, Lu-jie Zong, Yu Kou, Dan Hu

Abstract

The transtibial tunnel technique achieves equal length reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL). This study aimed to investigate whether transtibial tunnel technique can achieve anatomical reconstruction of ACL. For 25 corpses, the anterior soft tissue of the knee joint was detached so that the ligamentous surface was fully exposed, then the knee joint was fixed at 90° with an external fixator and the anterior cruciate ligament was removed. Double-sided laser technology was used to establish spatial conformation of ACL. The male to female ratio of the subjects was 19:6, with an average age of 59.52 ± 11.13 years. Patellar tendon length was 35.23 ± 5.10 mm, tibial eminence length and width was 15.75 ± 2.44 and 7.80 ± 1.28 mm, respectively, and femoral attachment length and width was 15.40 ± 2.17 and 8.97 ± 1.61 mm, respectively. When the flexion turned 90°, the tibial tunnel length was 31.83 ± 4.09 mm and the distance to the tibial plateau, patellar tendon, and medial collateral ligament was 16.33 ± 4.56, 10.79 ± 5.85, and 23.12 ± 5.99 mm, respectively. With the aid of double-sided laser technology, transtibial tunnel technique can safely achieve single-bundle reconstruction of ACL.

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 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 19 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 3 16%
Other 2 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 11%
Researcher 2 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 11%
Other 3 16%
Unknown 5 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 26%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 26%
Engineering 2 11%
Sports and Recreations 1 5%
Unspecified 1 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 5 26%
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 30 July 2018.
All research outputs
#15,542,250
of 23,098,660 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research
#664
of 1,407 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#209,957
of 330,303 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research
#21
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,098,660 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,407 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.6. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% 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 330,303 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.