↓ Skip to main content

A case report of primary pulmonary meningioma masquerading as lung metastasis in a patient with rectal carcinoma: role of 18F-FDG PET/CT

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery, May 2021
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
1 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
A case report of primary pulmonary meningioma masquerading as lung metastasis in a patient with rectal carcinoma: role of 18F-FDG PET/CT
Published in
Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery, May 2021
DOI 10.1186/s13019-021-01546-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Maoqing Jiang, Ping Chen, Rong Huang, Jingfeng Zhang, Jianjun Zheng

Abstract

Primary pulmonary meningioma (PPM) is an extremely rare disease, which is often misdiagnosed as lung metastasis. Previous studies indicated that PPM usually showed homogeneous enhancement on enhanced CT and high uptake of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (18F-FDG) on positron emission tomography/CT (PET/CT). In this study, we report a case of PPM with atypical enhanced CT and 18F-FDG PET/CT features in a patient with rectal carcinoma. A 70-year-old male was demonstrated to have rectal carcinoma by biopsy while a solitary pulmonary nodule (SPN) with well-defined edges measuring 13 × 13 × 15 mm was almost simultaneously found in the right lower robe on chest CT scan. Contrast-enhanced CT and PET/CT revealed mild centripetal enhancement of the nodule without accumulation of 18F-FDG. A thoracoscopic wedge resection of the right lower lobe was finally performed and histopathologic examinations and PET/CT imaging showed that the nodule was a PPM. PPM is a rare disease with heterogeneity not only in blood supply but also in glucose metabolism. 18F-FDG PET/CT may be an effective method for differentiating benign and malignant SPNs. The diagnosis of PPM depends on pathological and radiological examinations.

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 1 Mendeley reader of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 1 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Librarian 1 100%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 100%
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 2021.
All research outputs
#18,807,229
of 23,308,124 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery
#657
of 1,265 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#323,624
of 448,351 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery
#38
of 84 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,308,124 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 1,265 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.2. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% 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 448,351 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 84 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.