↓ Skip to main content

A promising tool for surgical lipotransfer: a constant pressure and quantity injection device in facial fat grafting

Overview of attention for article published in Burns & Trauma, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
18 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
A promising tool for surgical lipotransfer: a constant pressure and quantity injection device in facial fat grafting
Published in
Burns & Trauma, May 2017
DOI 10.1186/s41038-017-0077-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mei Song, Yi Liu, Ping Liu, Xianying Zhang

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to preliminarily assess a constant pressure and quantity fat granule injection device for minimal invasive properties in clinic. A retrospective controlled study was carried out, from October 2013 to January 2015, on 76 female healthy patients aged between 26 and 53 years at the General Hospital of Lanzhou Military Command, China. To achieve small volume, high thrust, and precision requirements of facial fat grafting, an integrated handheld controller and motor design was adopted, reducing the volume and weight of the fat transplantation injection device. The 76 patients underwent 90 procedures each side of the face; each patient was treated with the aforementioned device on the face's left side, while a conventional hand-push injection device was used on the right side as control. The outcome was assessed on pre- and postoperative images, with 6-24 months follow-up. The current device consistently allowed deposition of fat threads at about 55 μL/cm after cannula withdrawal; the volume of fat injected could be precisely adjusted to 0.04 mL/s. This device had the advantages of small-volume injection and convenient operation. The patients exhibited a good, stable shape and a smooth contour line in both sides. The long term satisfaction was higher for the left side than for the right one. Nodules and unevenness occurred only on the right side. Ecchymosis occurred significantly less frequent on the left side than the right one. Intraoperative pain was significantly lower for the left side than the right one. This device offered superior control compared with the conventional one and constitutes a promising tool for surgeons practicing lipotransfer.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 18 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 4 22%
Other 3 17%
Researcher 3 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 6%
Other 3 17%
Unknown 2 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 61%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 6%
Social Sciences 1 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 6%
Unknown 4 22%
Attention Score in Context

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 20 June 2017.
All research outputs
#20,660,571
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Burns & Trauma
#268
of 304 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#254,319
of 330,283 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Burns & Trauma
#6
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 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 304 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% 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 330,283 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.