| Title |
Surgical‐experimental principles of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction with open growth plates
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Experimental Orthopaedics, May 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40634-015-0027-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Romain Seil, Frederick K Weitz, Dietrich Pape |
| Abstract |
To review surgical and animal experimental studies performed with open growth plates in relation with pediatric anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. When it comes to the treatment of ACL injured children, there is a lack of current international guidelines, leaving the treating physicians with a therapeutic dilemma. A variety of surgical and animal experimental studies have been undertaken over the last decades in relation with open growth plates and ACL-reconstruction. Based on our own previous animal experimental data, we highlighted 15 specific points concerning pediatric ACL-reconstruction and reviewed additional literature concerning these individual items. Pediatric ACL-reconstruction could be proven to be safe in animal models. Growth abnormalities, risk factors and factors, which were specifically related to biological healing processes in children, were identified. From them surgical principles for safe pediatric ACL replacements can be deducted. Applying these principles through a correct technical execution of surgery may prevent clinically significant growth changes. Over the last 2 decades it has been shown that a technically correct pediatric ACL reconstruction has little risk in creating clinically significant growth abnormalities. Animal experiments support this hypothesis despite the fact that the gained knowledge cannot be fully generalized to humans. More long time follow-up is needed to fully understand the complete risk factors related to ACL surgery with open growth plates. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 21 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Sweden | 3 | 14% |
| Australia | 1 | 5% |
| Luxembourg | 1 | 5% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 5% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 5% |
| Canada | 1 | 5% |
| Monaco | 1 | 5% |
| Saudi Arabia | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 11 | 52% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 16 | 76% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 14% |
| Scientists | 1 | 5% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 5% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Qatar | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 39 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 18% |
| Other | 4 | 10% |
| Researcher | 4 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 9 | 23% |
| Unknown | 9 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 19 | 48% |
| Engineering | 3 | 8% |
| Sports and Recreations | 2 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 5% |
| Neuroscience | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 12 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 March 2017.
All research outputs
#2,276,531
of 22,876,619 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Experimental Orthopaedics
#15
of 328 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,855
of 263,945 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Experimental Orthopaedics
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,876,619 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 328 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 263,945 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 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