↓ Skip to main content

LINAC stereotactic radiosurgery for trigeminal neuralgia –retrospective two-institutional examination of treatment outcomes

Overview of attention for article published in Radiation Oncology, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

2 tweeters
1 Facebook page


5 Dimensions

Readers on

27 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.
LINAC stereotactic radiosurgery for trigeminal neuralgia –retrospective two-institutional examination of treatment outcomes
Published in
Radiation Oncology, August 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13014-018-1102-2
Pubmed ID

Ali Rashid, Bogdan Pintea, Thomas M. Kinfe, Gunnar Surber, Klaus Hamm, Jan P. Boström


In this pooled 2-center series LINAC radiosurgery (SRS) has been applied as a treatment option for a subset of refractory trigeminal neuralgia (TN) patients. This study approached to retrospectively assess the efficacy and safety of LINAC SRS and to provide a brief overview addressed to the technical development from frame-based towards frameless robotic SRS. From 2001 to 2017 n = 55 patients (pts) were treated, n = 28 were female (51%), mean age: 66 years (range 36-93 years); TN etiology: 37 classic TN, 15 multiple sclerosis (MS)-related TN, 2 symptomatic TN, and 1 atypical TN. Previous treatment was present in n = 35 (63.6%) pts. (some multiple or combined) with n = 23 microsurgical vascular decompression and n = 17 percutaneous retrogasserian rhizotomy. A 6 MV LINAC (4-5 mm collimators) was applied in all pts. (n = 26 framebased - n = 29 frameless robotic). The dorsal root entry zone (DREZ) was targeted in n = 35 cases and the retrogasserian target in n = 20 pts. with a homogeneous dose for the entire study cohort (90 Gy). SRS outcome was measured using the Barrow Neurological Institute (BNI) score for pain and hypaesthesia and statistically evaluated by univariate and multivariate analyzes. Mean follow-up (FU) was 30 months (2 lost FU); the total rate of post SRS BNI pain I-IIIa (=painfree w or w/o medication) was 69% (88% for the classic TN pts), 29% (38.8% classic TN) were classified as BNI pain I-II (=painfree w/o medication). A BNI hypaesthesia II-III was present in 9.4% (n = 5) and BNI hypaesthesia IV in n = 2. Between groups analysis demonstrated no correlation of SRS responsiveness with age, gender, MS- or not MS-associated TN, previous surgery, framebased/frameless robotic SRS. DREZ targeting significantly better suppressed TN compared to RG targeting (p = 0.01). Additionally, a statistical trend for a better BNI pain outcome (p = 0.07) along with a significant increase in BNI hypaesthesia (p = 0.01) was found when using a larger partial trigeminal 70 Gy volume. Our retrospective analysis support LINAC SRS as an effective and safe treatment option in TN. Frameless robotic SRS of TN is safe when using a dedicated LINAC system. A target definition closer to the brainstem and tendencially a larger target volume were associated with a better outcome for pain.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 27 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 5 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 15%
Researcher 3 11%
Student > Master 3 11%
Student > Bachelor 2 7%
Other 3 11%
Unknown 7 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 41%
Neuroscience 2 7%
Physics and Astronomy 2 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 7%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 8 30%

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 08 September 2018.
All research outputs
of 13,483,547 outputs
Outputs from Radiation Oncology
of 1,378 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 268,032 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Radiation Oncology
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,483,547 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 1,378 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.4. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% 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 268,032 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them