↓ Skip to main content

Primary Ewing sarcoma/primitive neuroectodermal tumor of the renal pelvis: a case report

Overview of attention for article published in World Journal of Surgical Oncology, September 2014
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 (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
9 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
Primary Ewing sarcoma/primitive neuroectodermal tumor of the renal pelvis: a case report
Published in
World Journal of Surgical Oncology, September 2014
DOI 10.1186/1477-7819-12-293
Pubmed ID
Authors

Zhihong Liu, Xianding Wang, You Lu, Libo Chen, Yiping Lu

Abstract

Ewing sarcoma/primitive neuroectodermal tumor (ES/PNET) is a childhood malignancy, typically occurring in the bone and rarely in any other part of the body. We herein present a case of ES/PNET of the renal pelvis. A 37-year-old male patient presented with a chief complaint of pain in the left flank and gross hematuria. The tumor had caused moderate hydronephrosis, and ureteroscopic biopsy findings were highly suspicious of sarcoma. Subsequently, radical nephroureterectomy was performed. On the basis of the pathological and cytogenetic findings, a final diagnosis of primary ES/PNET of left renal pelvis was made. Adjuvant chemotherapy with adriamycin and ifosfamide was initiated as ES/PNET often exhibits aggressive biological behavior. The patient was disease-free at his last regular follow-up visit 18 months after the surgery. To our knowledge, this is the first reported case of primary ES/PNET of the renal pelvis.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users 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 9 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 9 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 2 22%
Student > Master 2 22%
Lecturer 1 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 11%
Professor 1 11%
Other 2 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 56%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 11%
Unknown 3 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 24 September 2014.
All research outputs
#13,920,163
of 22,764,165 outputs
Outputs from World Journal of Surgical Oncology
#409
of 2,042 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#125,910
of 251,438 outputs
Outputs of similar age from World Journal of Surgical Oncology
#13
of 63 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,764,165 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,042 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 251,438 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 63 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.