↓ Skip to main content

Intramedullary spinal cord neurocysticercosis presenting as Brown-Séquard syndrome

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Neurology, January 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
54 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
17 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
Intramedullary spinal cord neurocysticercosis presenting as Brown-Séquard syndrome
Published in
BMC Neurology, January 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12883-014-0245-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Elda M Salazar Noguera, Rita Pineda Sic, Fernando Escoto Solis

Abstract

BackgroundCysticercosis is a parasitic disease caused by the larval stage of Taenia Solium. Involvement of the central nervous system by this tapeworm is endemic in developing countries. However, isolated spinal involvement by Taenia Solium is uncommon and having clinical presentation of Brown-Séquard syndrome is even rarer.Case presentationA 43-year-old male who came to the emergency department with clinical presentation of complete Brown-Séquard syndrome. Computed tomography scan of the brain was normal. Magnetic resonance imaging of the thoracic spine revealed an intramedullary mass of the spinal cord at C-7/T-l level. Patient underwent surgery that revealed a cystic lesion and was resected. Histopathological report confirmed the diagnosis of neurocysticercosis. Postoperatively, oral steroid therapy and a four week course of albendazol were administered.ConclusionsIntramedullary neurcysticercosis represents a diagnostic challenge and should be considered in intramedullary lesions in settings where Taenia solium is endemic. Clinical, pathophysiological and diagnostic aspects of spinal cord intramedullary neurocysticercosis are discussed.

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 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 17 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 4 24%
Student > Postgraduate 3 18%
Researcher 3 18%
Professor 2 12%
Lecturer 1 6%
Other 2 12%
Unknown 2 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 47%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 6%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 6%
Social Sciences 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 4 24%
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 19 March 2015.
All research outputs
#20,249,662
of 22,778,347 outputs
Outputs from BMC Neurology
#2,132
of 2,428 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#295,732
of 352,360 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Neurology
#25
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,778,347 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,428 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 352,360 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.