Hit papers significantly outperform the citation benchmark for their cohort. A paper qualifies
if it has ≥500 total citations, achieves ≥1.5× the top-1% citation threshold for papers in the
same subfield and year (this is the minimum needed to enter the top 1%, not the average
within it), or reaches the top citation threshold in at least one of its specific research
topics.
Detection of middle cerebral artery emboli during carotid endarterectomy using transcranial Doppler ultrasonography.
1990377 citationsMerrill P. Spencer, George I. Thomas et al.Strokeprofile →
Peers — A (Enhanced Table)
Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late)
cites ·
hero ref
This map shows the geographic impact of L R Sauvage's research. It shows the number of citations coming from papers published by authors working in each country. You can also color the map by specialization and compare the number of citations received by L R Sauvage with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites L R Sauvage more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by L R Sauvage. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers produced by L R Sauvage. The network helps show where L R Sauvage may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of L R Sauvage
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of L R Sauvage.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of L R Sauvage based on the total number of
citations received by their joint publications. Widths of edges
represent the number of papers authors have co-authored together.
Node borders
signify the number of papers an author published with L R Sauvage. L R Sauvage is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
All Works
20 of 20 papers shown
1.
Zammit, Michael, et al.. (2000). Use of arm veins for lower extremity arterial bypass--results, anatomical features and technical considerations.. PubMed. 38(2). 36–41.3 indexed citations
Herring, Susan W., et al.. (1992). Significance of the biopsy site of the latissimus dorsi muscle for fiber typing.. PubMed. 11(5). S315–9.8 indexed citations
5.
Spencer, Merrill P., George I. Thomas, Stephen C. Nicholls, & L R Sauvage. (1990). Detection of middle cerebral artery emboli during carotid endarterectomy using transcranial Doppler ultrasonography.. Stroke. 21(3). 415–423.377 indexed citations breakdown →
6.
Wurtz, Alain, et al.. (1987). [Anatomical assessment of retroperitoneal adenopathies by surgical endoscopy. Apropos of 52 retroperitoneoscopies in 49 patients].. PubMed. 41(4). 258–63.5 indexed citations
7.
Mazeman, E, et al.. (1987). Extraperitoneal pelvioscopy in the evaluation of lymph node extension of prostatic cancer.. PubMed. 243B. 49–54.2 indexed citations
Zammit, Michael, Hong‐De Wu, Sven R. Mathisen, & L R Sauvage. (1986). Influence on healing in the canine thoracic aorta of three substances used to close the interstices of macroporous Dacron grafts.. PubMed. 52(12). 667–9.1 indexed citations
12.
Sauvage, L R, et al.. (1979). False aneurysm of the left ventricle. Report of four cases and review of surgical management.. PubMed. 189(4). 409–15.33 indexed citations
Hessel, Eugene A., E. A. Boyden, Stanley J. Stamm, & L R Sauvage. (1970). High systemic origin of the sole artery to the basal segments of the left lung: findings, surgical treatment, and embryologic interpretation.. PubMed. 67(4). 624–32.49 indexed citations
Sauvage, L R & Sigmund A. Wesolowski. (1954). The influence of suture method upon the incidence of thrombosis in artery-artery, vein-vein, and artery-vein-artery anastomoses.. PubMed. 36(2). 227–32.7 indexed citations
Rankless uses publication and citation data sourced from OpenAlex, an open and comprehensive
bibliographic database. While OpenAlex provides broad and valuable coverage of the global
research landscape, it—like all bibliographic datasets—has inherent limitations. These include
incomplete records, variations in author disambiguation, differences in journal indexing, and
delays in data updates. As a result, some metrics and network relationships displayed in
Rankless may not fully capture the entirety of a scholar's output or impact.