| Title |
Image-guided surgery and craniofacial applications: mastering the unseen
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Maxillofacial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, November 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40902-015-0037-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
James C. Wang, Laszlo Nagy, Joshua C. Demke |
| Abstract |
Image-guided surgery potentially enhances intraoperative safety and outcomes in a variety of craniomaxillofacial procedures. We explore the efficiency of one intraoperative navigation system in a single complex craniofacial case, review the initial and recurring costs, and estimate the added cost (e.g., additional setup time, registration). We discuss the potential challenges and benefits of utilizing image-guided surgery in our specific case and its benefits in terms of educational and teaching purposes and compare this with traditional osteotomies that rely on a surgeon's thorough understanding of anatomy coupled with tactile feedback to blindly guide the osteotome during surgery. A 13-year-old presented with untreated syndromic multi-suture synostosis, brachycephaly, severe exorbitism, and midface hypoplasia. For now, initial costs are high, recurring costs are relatively low, and there are perceived benefits of imaged-guided surgery as an excellent teaching tool for visualizing difficult and often unseen anatomy through computerized software and multi-planar real-time images. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 17 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 18% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 18% |
| Other | 2 | 12% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 3 | 18% |
| Unknown | 3 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 47% |
| Engineering | 4 | 24% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 6% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 3 | 18% |
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 01 December 2015.
All research outputs
#20,655,488
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Maxillofacial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
#45
of 82 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#289,193
of 392,786 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Maxillofacial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
#3
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 82 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.6. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% 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 392,786 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.