↓ Skip to main content

Retrograde intubation in a dog with severe temporomandibular joint ankylosis: case report

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Veterinary Research, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Readers on

mendeley
31 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
Retrograde intubation in a dog with severe temporomandibular joint ankylosis: case report
Published in
BMC Veterinary Research, March 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12917-018-1439-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Verónica Vieitez, Luis Javier Ezquerra, Víctor López Rámis, Massimo Santella, Ignacio Álvarez Gómez de Segura

Abstract

Orotracheal intubation in dogs is a common and easily-performed procedure that provides a patent airway during anaesthesia. In dogs with temporomandibular joint ankylosis or pseudo-ankylosis, airway management can be a challenging procedure since these dogs have a limited ability to open their mouth. Methods to provide safe, uneventful intubation in such patients may include minimally invasive techniques such as retrograde intubation using a guide wire and fibre-optic-aided laryngoscopy. We report a case of a 16-month-old, intact female Bull Terrier weighing 17 kg, admitted to the hospital for surgical treatment of bilateral ankylosis of the temporomandibular joint. Intubation was achieved, without direct observation of the larynx, by retrograde intubation using a vascular access catheter and a vascular wire guide through cricothyroid membrane. Bilateral condylectomy was performed and the dog recovered uneventfully. In conclusion, retrograde intubation was relatively simple to perform with the guide wire technique and no specific training or equipment were necessary.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 31 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 5 16%
Student > Bachelor 2 6%
Researcher 2 6%
Student > Master 2 6%
Lecturer 1 3%
Other 4 13%
Unknown 15 48%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 8 26%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 19%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Computer Science 1 3%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 14 45%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 September 2018.
All research outputs
#13,509,734
of 23,031,582 outputs
Outputs from BMC Veterinary Research
#915
of 3,068 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#169,246
of 330,033 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Veterinary Research
#28
of 98 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,031,582 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,068 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 330,033 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 98 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 70% of its contemporaries.