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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
A Modified Rabbit Ulna Defect Model for Evaluating Periosteal Substitutes in Bone Engineering: A Pilot Study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology, January 2015
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fbioe.2014.00080 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Rania M. El Backly, Danilo Chiapale, Anita Muraglia, Giuliana Tromba, Chiara Ottonello, Federico Santolini, Ranieri Cancedda, Maddalena Mastrogiacomo |
| Abstract |
The present work defines a modified critical size rabbit ulna defect model for bone regeneration in which a non-resorbable barrier membrane was used to separate the radius from the ulna to create a valid model for evaluation of tissue-engineered periosteal substitutes. Eight rabbits divided into two groups were used. Critical defects (15 mm) were made in the ulna completely eliminating periosteum. For group I, defects were filled with a nanohydroxyapatite poly(ester urethane) scaffold soaked in PBS and left as such (group Ia) or wrapped with a tissue-engineered periosteal substitute (group Ib). For group II, an expanded-polytetrafluoroethylene (e-PTFE) (GORE-TEX(®)) membrane was inserted around the radius then the defects received either scaffold alone (group IIa) or scaffold wrapped with periosteal substitute (group IIb). Animals were euthanized after 12-16 weeks, and bone regeneration was evaluated by radiography, computed microtomography (μCT), and histology. In the first group, we observed formation of radio-ulnar synostosis irrespective of the treatment. This was completely eliminated upon placement of the e-PTFE (GORE-TEX(®)) membrane in the second group of animals. In conclusion, modification of the model using a non-resorbable e-PTFE membrane to isolate the ulna from the radius was a valuable addition allowing for objective evaluation of the tissue-engineered periosteal substitute. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 17 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 29% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 18% |
| Professor | 2 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 4 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 24% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 18% |
| Psychology | 1 | 6% |
| Materials Science | 1 | 6% |
| Engineering | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 7 | 41% |
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 10 January 2015.
All research outputs
#18,388,295
of 22,776,824 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
#3,383
of 6,524 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#255,480
of 352,333 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
#33
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,776,824 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,524 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% 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 352,333 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.