↓ Skip to main content

Unusual evolution of leiomyosarcoma of the rectum: a case report and review of the literature

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Medical Case Reports, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
12 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
Unusual evolution of leiomyosarcoma of the rectum: a case report and review of the literature
Published in
Journal of Medical Case Reports, September 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13256-016-1047-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

N. Sahli, M. Khmou, J. Khalil, S. Elmajjaoui, B. El Khannoussi, T. Kebdani, H. Elkacemi, N. Benjaafar

Abstract

Leiomyosarcoma of the rectum is a rare entity that comprises less than 0.1 % of all rectal malignancies. Given the uncommon nature of this tumor and the controversy about its treatment we report one case and review the literature in an attempt to report a particular evolution and to discuss the most appropriate treatment. This case report describes the presentation of leiomyosarcoma of the rectum. A 30-year-old man from the north of Morocco presented with rectorrhagia and constipation. On physical examination we found a mass in his rectum approximately 6 cm from his anal margin. Pelvic magnetic resonance imaging showed a rectal mass with a parietal attachment that invaded the fascia and his perirectal tissue. Before any treatment he defecated spontaneously the tumor. On histopathological examination a diagnosis of leiomyosarcoma was made. An anterior resection of his rectum was performed with adjuvant radiotherapy at a dose of 50 Gy. After 1 year of surveillance, he has not presented any clinical symptoms and pelvic magnetic resonance imaging was normal. Unfortunately, histological analysis of a superficial biopsy of a rectal leiomyosarcoma may not be reflective of the entire tumor mass, and a diagnosis is based essentially on postoperative pathological examination. The optimal treatment modality in patients with rectal leiomyosarcomas is controversial. Prognosis is also poor; tumor size, histological grade, mitotic index, and local staging are the most known prognosis factors. The prognosis of rectal leiomyosarcoma is poor; more investigations are necessary to understand the progression of these tumors and to define an optimal treatment modality.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 12 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 12 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 3 25%
Researcher 3 25%
Other 2 17%
Student > Postgraduate 1 8%
Unknown 3 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 75%
Unknown 3 25%

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 06 October 2016.
All research outputs
#7,055,686
of 11,329,665 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Medical Case Reports
#618
of 1,684 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#143,855
of 259,266 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Medical Case Reports
#29
of 103 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,329,665 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,684 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its peers.
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 259,266 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 103 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.