1,720,962 research outputs found

    [Arteriovenous malformations of the head and neck. Diagnosis and methods of treatment]. FT Malformazioni artero-venose del distretto cervico-facciale. Diagnosi e metodi di trattamento.

    No full text
    BACKGROUND: After a review of the literature, the results of a clinical study carried out on cases of extracranial arteriovenous malformations of the head and neck, are reported. METHODS: Thirteen patients with extracranial arteriovenous malformations of the head and neck have been treated at the Maxillofacial Department of the University of Parma from 1995 to 2000. Five patients observed the onset in childhood, five in adolescence and three in adulthood. Arteriovenous malformations have been classified according to Schobinger's clinical staging. Four patients with superselective embolization, one with surgical resection and the remaining eight with superselective embolization followed by radical en bloc resection have been treated. The follow-up period varied from 2 to 5 years. RESULTS: No relapses have been observed in the cases treated with surgical resection and with superselective embolization followed by radical excision. Only 1 patient treated by superselective embolization had a good outcome. This treatment can be a good palliative in the treatment pain and bleeding particularly when surgical excision would result in mutilation or disfigurement, nevertheless it is necessary a careful follow-up since the lesion treated only by superselective embolization can grow quickly and begin bleeding and aching again. CONCLUSIONS: In personal experience, according to the literature, embolic/surgical management of arteriovenous malformations is not always the treatment of choice. On the basis of clinical characteristics of the lesions, different kinds of treatments (embolization, resection, embolization followed by resection) may be chosen to obtain favorable RESULTS

    Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis

    Full text link
    The present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
    corecore