↓ Skip to main content

Mandibular distraction in neonates: indications, technique, results

Overview of attention for article published in Italian Journal of Pediatrics, February 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
38 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
87 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Mandibular distraction in neonates: indications, technique, results
Published in
Italian Journal of Pediatrics, February 2012
DOI 10.1186/1824-7288-38-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Enrico Sesenna, Alice S Magri, Cinzia Magnani, Bruno C Brevi, Marilena L Anghinoni

Abstract

The Pierre Robin Sequence features were first described by Robin in 1923 and include micrognathia, glossoptosis and respiratory distress with an incidence estimated as 1:8,500 to 1:20,000 newborns. Upper airway obstruction and feeding difficulties are the main concerns related to the pathology. Mandibular distraction should be considered a treatment option (when other treatments result inadequate). PATIANTS AND METHODS: Ten patients between the ages of 1 month and 2 years with severe micrognathia and airway obstruction were treated with Mandibular Distraction Osteogenesis (MDO).All patients underwent fibroscopic examination of the upper airway and a radiographic imaging and/or computed tomography scans to detect malformations and to confirm that the obstruction was caused by posterior tongue displacement. All patients were evaluated by a multidisciplinary team. Indications for surgery included frequent apneic episodes with severe desaturation (70%). Gavage therapy was employed in all patients since oral feeding was not possible. The two tracheotomy patients were 5 months and 2 years old respectively, and the distraction procedure was performed to remove the tracheotomy tube. All patients were treated with bilateral mandibular distraction: two cases with an external multivector distraction device, six cases with an internal non-resorbable device and two cases with an internal resorbable device. In one case, the patient with Goldenhar's Syndrome, the procedure was repeated.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 87 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Poland 1 1%
Nigeria 1 1%
Unknown 85 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 14 16%
Student > Postgraduate 13 15%
Researcher 8 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 8%
Lecturer 5 6%
Other 18 21%
Unknown 22 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 47 54%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 5%
Psychology 3 3%
Unspecified 1 1%
Other 5 6%
Unknown 23 26%
Attention Score in Context

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 09 April 2016.
All research outputs
#7,688,890
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Italian Journal of Pediatrics
#289
of 1,059 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#66,007
of 253,563 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Italian Journal of Pediatrics
#2
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,059 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 253,563 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 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.