↓ Skip to main content

New Insights in Trigeminal Anatomy: A Double Orofacial Tract for Nociceptive Input

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neuroanatomy, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Readers on

mendeley
65 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
New Insights in Trigeminal Anatomy: A Double Orofacial Tract for Nociceptive Input
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroanatomy, May 2016
DOI 10.3389/fnana.2016.00053
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dylan J. H. A. Henssen, Erkan Kurt, Tamas Kozicz, Robert van Dongen, Ronald H. M. A. Bartels, Anne-Marie van Cappellen van Walsum

Abstract

Orofacial pain in patients relies on the anatomical pathways that conduct nociceptive information, originating from the periphery towards the trigeminal sensory nucleus complex (TSNC) and finally, to the thalami and the somatosensorical cortical regions. The anatomy and function of the so-called trigeminothalamic tracts have been investigated before. In these animal-based studies from the previous century, the intracerebral pathways were mapped using different retro- and anterograde tracing methods. We review the literature on the trigeminothalamic tracts focusing on these animal tracer studies. Subsequently, we related the observations of these studies to clinical findings using fMRI trials. The intracerebral trigeminal pathways can be subdivided into three pathways: a ventral (contralateral) and dorsal (mainly ipsilateral) trigeminothalamic tract and the intranuclear pathway. Based on the reviewed evidence we hypothesize the co-existence of an ipsilateral nociceptive conduction tract to the cerebral cortex and we translate evidence from animal-based research to the human anatomy. Our hypothesis differs from the classical idea that orofacial pain arises only from nociceptive information via the contralateral, ventral trigeminothalamic pathway. Better understanding of the histology, anatomy and connectivity of the trigeminal fibers could contribute to the discovery of a more effective pain treatment in patients suffering from various orofacial pain syndromes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users 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 65 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Chile 1 2%
Netherlands 1 2%
Belgium 1 2%
Unknown 62 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 14%
Student > Bachelor 8 12%
Student > Master 7 11%
Other 5 8%
Other 15 23%
Unknown 10 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 29 45%
Neuroscience 15 23%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 2%
Psychology 1 2%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 12 18%
Attention Score in Context

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 12 March 2019.
All research outputs
#14,849,861
of 22,869,263 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroanatomy
#711
of 1,162 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#174,520
of 304,990 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroanatomy
#26
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,869,263 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,162 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.9. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 304,990 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 43 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.