| Title |
Influence of fatty deposits in the levator aponeurosis/levator palpebrae superioris muscle on outcomes of aponeurotic repair in a Japanese population
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Eye, August 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1038/s41433-018-0190-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Hiromichi Matsuda, Tsutomu Sakai, Yasuhiro Takahashi, Masaki Nakamura, Tadashi Nakano |
| Abstract |
To examine a part of the levator aponeurosis/levator palpebrae superioris (LPS) muscle that did not have fatty deposits in patients with aponeurotic blepharoptosis. We also analysed the relation between this length and surgical outcome after transcutaneous aponeurotic repair. We measured the vertical length from the distal end of the anterior layer of the levator aponeurosis to the most distal point of fatty deposits in the levator aponeurosis/LPS muscle (non-fatty-deposit length) in 94 eyelids. Surgical success was defined as a postoperative margin reflex distance-1 (MRD-1) of 2.0-5.0 mm at 3 months postoperatively. The eyelids were classified into two groups: a surgical success group (group A, 76 eyelids) and an undercorrected group (group B, 18 eyelids). Group A was subdivided according to the evidence of a fatty deposit (group A1, fat present, 70 eyelids; group A2, fat absent, 6 eyelids). The non-fatty-deposit measurement was significantly longer in group A1 than in group B (p = 0.035). The levator aponeurosis was less advanced in groups A1 and A2 than in group B (both, p < 0.001), and the eyelids in groups A1 and A2 obtained a higher MRD-1 than those in group B (both, p < 0.001). Eyelids with less fat deposit required less advancement of the levator aponeurosis and obtained more favourable surgical results. Intraoperative findings of eyelids with and without fatty deposits and measuring the non-fatty-deposit length may be useful predictive parameters for outcomes of transcutaneous aponeurotic repair. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
| South Africa | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 2 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Neuroscience | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 03 January 2019.
All research outputs
#15,093,455
of 23,968,814 outputs
Outputs from Eye
#2,378
of 4,411 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#173,590
of 304,696 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Eye
#39
of 61 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,968,814 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 4,411 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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 304,696 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 61 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.