↓ Skip to main content

Analysis of bone cement distribution around fenestrated pedicle screws in low bone quality lumbosacral vertebrae

Overview of attention for article published in International Orthopaedics, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 tweeters

Readers on

mendeley
2 Mendeley
Title
Analysis of bone cement distribution around fenestrated pedicle screws in low bone quality lumbosacral vertebrae
Published in
International Orthopaedics, August 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00264-018-4115-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sergio Gómez González, Gerard Cabestany Bastida, Maria Daniela Vlad, José López López, Pablo Buenestado Caballero, Luis Alvarez-Galovich, Maria Rodríguez-Arguisjuela, Enrique Fernández Aguado

Abstract

To study the exact distribution of bone cement around augmented fenestrated pedicle screws in both lumbar and sacral vertebrae of patients with low bone quality. A total of 37 patients with instrumented lumbar fusion were investigated. 3D computed tomography virtual models of the injected cement and screws were obtained. The models were computed for their centroid (i.e. their average mass centre point), and their coordinates (x, y, z) were projected on their respective screw-transversal and screw-longitudinal planes for further analysis. The results showed better bone cement homogeneous distribution around the screws in lumbar (L4 and L5) than in sacral (S1) vertebrae. In the lumbar region, the centroids were transversally projected near the transversal centre of symmetry of the screws. On the other hand, in the sacral region, the cement flowed preferentially outside the centre of symmetry of the screws, into the sacral ala. The results confirm the different flow behaviours of bone cement in lumbar versus sacra vertebrae. The computer methodology followed in this study helps to understand the clinical monitoring observations and lays the foundations for better positioning of the screws and specific vertebrae-oriented screw designs.

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 2 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 2 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 1 50%
Librarian 1 50%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 1 50%
Unspecified 1 50%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 19 July 2019.
All research outputs
#3,058,930
of 13,385,708 outputs
Outputs from International Orthopaedics
#203
of 916 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#78,579
of 267,977 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Orthopaedics
#5
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,385,708 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 77th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 916 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 267,977 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 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.