↓ Skip to main content

Brain tumors in eloquent areas: A European multicenter survey of intraoperative mapping techniques, intraoperative seizures occurrence, and antiepileptic drug prophylaxis

Overview of attention for article published in Neurosurgical Review, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (61st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
57 Mendeley
Title
Brain tumors in eloquent areas: A European multicenter survey of intraoperative mapping techniques, intraoperative seizures occurrence, and antiepileptic drug prophylaxis
Published in
Neurosurgical Review, August 2016
DOI 10.1007/s10143-016-0771-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Giannantonio Spena, Philippe Schucht, Kathleen Seidel, Geert-Jan Rutten, Christian Franz Freyschlag, Federico D’Agata, Emanule Costi, Francesca Zappa, Marco Fontanella, Denys Fontaine, Fabien Almairac, Michele Cavallo, Pasquale De Bonis, Gerardo Conesa, Nicholas Foroglou, Santiago Gil-Robles, Emanuel Mandonnet, Juan Martino, Thomas Picht, Catarina Viegas, Michel Wager, Johan Pallud

Abstract

Intraoperative mapping and monitoring techniques for eloquent area tumors are routinely used world wide. Very few data are available regarding mapping and monitoring methods and preferences, intraoperative seizures occurrence and perioperative antiepileptic drug management. A questionnaire was sent to 20 European centers with experience in intraoperative mapping or neurophysiological monitoring for the treatment of eloquent area tumors. Fifteen centers returned the completed questionnaires. Data was available on 2098 patients. 863 patients (41.1%) were operated on through awake surgery and intraoperative mapping, while 1235 patients (58.8%) received asleep surgery and intraoperative electrophysiological monitoring or mapping. There was great heterogeneity between centers with some totally AW oriented (up to 100%) and other almost totally ASL oriented (up to 92%) (31% SD). For awake surgery, 79.9% centers preferred an asleep-awake-asleep anesthesia protocol. Only 53.3% of the centers used ECoG or transcutaneous EEG. The incidence of intraoperative seizures varied significantly between centers, ranging from 2.5% to 54% (p < 0.001). It there appears to be a statistically significant link between the mastery of mapping technique and the risk of intraoperative seizures. Moreover, history of preoperative seizures can significantly increase the risk of intraoperative seizures (p < 0.001). Intraoperative seizures occurrence was similar in patients with or without perioperative drugs (12% vs. 12%, p = 0.2). This is the first European survey to assess intraoperative functional mapping and monitoring protocols and the management of peri- and intraoperative seizures. This data can help identify specific aspects that need to be investigated in prospective and controlled studies.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Portugal 2 4%
Unknown 55 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 11%
Professor > Associate Professor 6 11%
Student > Postgraduate 5 9%
Other 5 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 7%
Other 14 25%
Unknown 17 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 24 42%
Neuroscience 5 9%
Computer Science 1 2%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 24 42%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 26 September 2016.
All research outputs
#8,049,312
of 15,640,884 outputs
Outputs from Neurosurgical Review
#120
of 352 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#101,155
of 266,617 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neurosurgical Review
#1
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,640,884 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 352 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its peers.
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 266,617 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 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