↓ Skip to main content

Comparison of three imaging modalities used to evaluate bone healing after tibial tuberosity advancement in cranial cruciate ligament-deficient dogs and comparison of the effect of a gelatinous…

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

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
49 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
Comparison of three imaging modalities used to evaluate bone healing after tibial tuberosity advancement in cranial cruciate ligament-deficient dogs and comparison of the effect of a gelatinous matrix and a demineralized bone matrix mix on bone healing – a pilot study
Published in
BMC Veterinary Research, May 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12917-018-1490-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marije Risselada, Matthew D. Winter, Daniel D. Lewis, Emily Griffith, Antonio Pozzi

Abstract

Bone healing and assessment of the state of bone bridging is an important part of clinical orthopedics, whether for fracture healing or for follow up of osteotomy procedures. Tibial tuberosity advancement (TTA) is designed to restore stability in cruciate deficient stifle joints by advancing the tuberosity while creating an osteotomy gap. The current study aims to: 1) compare three different imaging modalities to assess bone healing: ultrasound, radiographs and computed tomography (CT) and, to 2) compare the effect of a gelatinous matrix (GM) versus a demineralized bone matrix mix (DBM mix) on bone healing and bridging of this osteotomy gap in 10 otherwise healthy client-owned dogs with cranial cruciate ligament insufficiency. Osseous union of the osteotomy gap was evaluated with ultrasound, radiographs and CT at one, two, and 3 months postoperatively. Dogs were randomly selected to receive GM or DBM mix to fill the osteotomy gap created during the TTA procedure. Bone healing was assessed subjectively on all modalities as well as scored on radiographs and measured using Hounsfield units (HUs) on CT. Time to heal based on ultrasound, radiographs and CT were statistically compared between groups with significance set at p < 0.05. All osteotomy gaps were bridged with bone within 3 months for all modalities. Bridging bone was diagnosed in 5.6 weeks, 10.4 weeks and 9.6 weeks based on ultrasound, radiographs, and CT, respectively, in dogs treated with DBM mix. In dogs treated with GM osseous union was diagnosed in a mean of 4.0 weeks, 9.6 weeks and 7.2 weeks based on ultrasound, radiographs and CT. Ultrasound diagnosed osseous union significantly faster than both CT and radiographs (p < 0.001). The dimensions of the newly formed bone differed between treatment groups with the central portion of the bone only providing a small bridge in GM cases. Although bridging of the osteotomy gap occurred earlier in the group that received GM, no significant statistical difference was found between the two groups. Radiographs overestimate the time needed for osseous union of the osteotomy gap. All osteotomy sites healed radiographically within 3 months.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 49 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 8 16%
Student > Master 6 12%
Researcher 5 10%
Student > Postgraduate 5 10%
Other 4 8%
Other 9 18%
Unknown 12 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 31%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 14 29%
Engineering 2 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 14 29%
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 10 June 2018.
All research outputs
#15,522,480
of 23,070,218 outputs
Outputs from BMC Veterinary Research
#1,435
of 3,076 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#209,994
of 330,078 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Veterinary Research
#31
of 80 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,070,218 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,076 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% 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 330,078 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 80 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 52% of its contemporaries.