↓ Skip to main content

The Use of the Goldfinger Dissector (GD) in Laparoscopic Sacrocolpopexy

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Medicine, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
3 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
The Use of the Goldfinger Dissector (GD) in Laparoscopic Sacrocolpopexy
Published in
Frontiers in Medicine, May 2018
DOI 10.3389/fmed.2018.00155
Pubmed ID
Authors

Pascal Talla, Maria Ekotomati, Tara O'Leary, Nordine Ben Ali

Abstract

We tested the employment of the GD to create a retroperitoneal tunnel between the promontory and the vaginal apex during the laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy with a mesh. Thus far no report has experimented the use of the GD in this indication. This study's aim was to evaluate the safety and the interest to use this laparoscopic instrument. Sixteen consecutive patients underwent a laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy with the use of the GD and were compared with a control group constituted by the previous 30 cases. The median operating time was 180 min with the use of the GD and represent a gain of time of 22 min in comparaison with our control group. No conversion to open or complications were recorded. In our limited experience, the use of the GD allows a significant gain of time and limits the amount of peritoneal dissection.

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.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 3 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 3 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 33%
Lecturer 1 33%
Student > Master 1 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 2 67%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 33%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 33%
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 31 May 2018.
All research outputs
#18,633,675
of 23,083,773 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Medicine
#4,057
of 5,844 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#255,910
of 331,171 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Medicine
#86
of 105 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,083,773 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,844 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.4. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% 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 331,171 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 105 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.