↓ Skip to main content

Optimal site for facial nerve transection and neurorrhaphy: a randomized prospective animal study

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Otolaryngology -- Head & Neck Surgery, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#43 of 155)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
21 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
Optimal site for facial nerve transection and neurorrhaphy: a randomized prospective animal study
Published in
Journal of Otolaryngology -- Head & Neck Surgery, May 2015
DOI 10.1186/s40463-015-0072-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Adrian I. Mendez, Hadi Seikaly, Vincent Biron, Lin-fu Zhu, David W. J. Côté

Abstract

Since the first facial allograft transplantation was performed, several institutions have performed the procedure with the main objectives being restoration of the aesthetic appearance and expressive function of the face. The optimal location to transect the facial nerve during flap harvest in transplantation to preserve facial movement function is currently unknown. There are currently two primary methods to perform facial nerve neurorrhaphy between the donor and recipient-one protocol involves transection and repair of the facial nerve at the main trunk while the another protocol advocates for the neurorrhaphy to be performed distally at the main branches. The purpose of this study is to establish the optimal location for transection and repair of the facial nerve to optimize functional recovery of facial movement. A prospective randomized controlled trial using a rat model was performed. Two groups of 12 rats underwent facial nerve transection and subsequent repair either at the main trunk of the nerve (group 1) or 2 cm distally, at the main bifurcation (group 2). Primary outcome of nerve functional recovery was measured using a previously validated laser curtain model, which measured amplitude of whisking at 2, 4, and 6 post-operatively. The deflection of the laser curtain sent a digital signal that was interpreted by central computer software. At week 2 post-nerve surgery, the average amplitude observed for group 1 and 2 was 4.4 and 10.8 degrees, respectively. At week 4, group 1 showed improvement with an average amplitude of 9.7 degrees, while group 2 displayed an average of 10.2 degrees. The week 6 results showed the greatest improvement from baseline for group 1. Group 1 and 2 had average amplitudes of 17.2 and 6.9 degrees, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups at 2, 4, and 6 weeks after facial nerve surgery (p > 0.05). We found no statistical difference between these two locations of nerve repair using identical methods. Therefore, the authors recommend a single versus multiple nerve repair technique. This finding has potential implications for future facial allograft transplantations and at minimum necessitates further study with long-term follow-up data.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 21 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 4 19%
Student > Postgraduate 3 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 14%
Student > Master 3 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 10%
Other 3 14%
Unknown 3 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 57%
Computer Science 1 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 5%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 5%
Engineering 1 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 5 24%

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 25 May 2015.
All research outputs
#2,715,160
of 5,141,487 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Otolaryngology -- Head & Neck Surgery
#43
of 155 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#98,207
of 172,746 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Otolaryngology -- Head & Neck Surgery
#2
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 5,141,487 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 155 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.4. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% 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 172,746 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 7 of them.