| Title |
Multimodality imaging of subacromial impingement syndrome
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Skeletal Radiology, February 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00256-018-2875-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Lionel Pesquer, Sophie Borghol, Philippe Meyer, Mickael Ropars, Benjamin Dallaudière, Pierre Abadie |
| Abstract |
Subacromial impingement syndrome results from irritation of the tendons of the rotator cuff muscles in the subacromial space and may manifest as a range of pathologies. However, subacromial impingement is a dynamic condition for which imaging reveals predisposing factors but no pathognomonic indicators. Also, the usual imaging features of subacromial impingement may be seen in symptomatic and asymptomatic patients. Therefore, imaging is able to detect tears and describe the risk factors of impingement but cannot confirm subacromial impingement. Radiographs allow assessment of the morphology of the acromion and its lateral extension by means of the acromial index and the critical shoulder angle, which may increase in cases of subacromial impingement. Ultrasound is necessary to evaluate a tendon tear and is the only tool that provides dynamic information, which is essential to assessing dynamic conditions. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) allows the assessment of associated intraarticular abnormalities, joint effusion, and bone marrow edema. The objective of this article is to provide an overview of the pathophysiology and clinical manifestations of subacromial impingement and discuss recent advances in the imaging of subacromial impingement and the role of radiography, ultrasound, and MRI in differentiating normal from pathologic findings. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 113 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 113 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 23 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 13 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 8% |
| Researcher | 8 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 5% |
| Other | 16 | 14% |
| Unknown | 38 | 34% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 35 | 31% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 21 | 19% |
| Sports and Recreations | 6 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 2% |
| Psychology | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 4 | 4% |
| Unknown | 43 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 20 November 2021.
All research outputs
#6,515,028
of 23,092,602 outputs
Outputs from Skeletal Radiology
#348
of 1,481 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#137,686
of 446,538 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Skeletal Radiology
#8
of 64 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,092,602 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,481 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 446,538 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 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 64 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.