| Title |
CT-guided percutaneous drilling is a safe and reliable method of treating osteoid osteomas
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
SpringerPlus, January 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/2193-1801-2-34 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Edgard Eduard Engel, Nelson Fabrício Gava, Marcello Henrique Nogueira-Barbosa, Filipe Almeida Botter |
| Abstract |
Computed tomography (CT)-guided percutaneous drilling is an alternative for osteoid osteoma treatment. This study aims to evaluate the remodeling of the drill orifice. The success rate and complications were also recorded and compared with other treatment methods. Fifteen patients with an average age of fourteen years (ranging from 4 to 25) submitted to CT-guided percutaneous drilling between 2003 and 2009 were retrospectively analyzed according to clinical and radiological criteria. Fourteen cases showed complete alleviation of pain one week after surgery. No relapse was detected even in the subject who continued complaining of pain. All patients were treated with a day-hospital regimen and were discharged with partial weight bearing. Total weight bearing was allowed after one month, and sports were allowed after consolidation, which occurred in all but one case after the third month. One patient, who did not follow our medical advice, returned to sports activities after two weeks and experienced a fracture as a result. Atrophy of the vastus lateralis muscle developed after the procedure in another patient. Our case series suggests that this method is reliable and safe. The level of complexity is comparable with other minimally invasive percutaneous procedures. The cost is low because there is no need to buy probes or other equipment. The negative points include weakening of the bone and the logistical problem of assembling the orthopedic surgeon, radiologist, and anesthesiologist in the tomography room. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 18 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unspecified | 4 | 21% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 4 | 21% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 11% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 6 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 32% |
| Unspecified | 4 | 21% |
| Neuroscience | 1 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 7 | 37% |
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 31 January 2013.
All research outputs
#20,180,477
of 22,694,633 outputs
Outputs from SpringerPlus
#1,461
of 1,852 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#249,320
of 282,272 outputs
Outputs of similar age from SpringerPlus
#53
of 102 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,694,633 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,852 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 282,272 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 102 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.