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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Clinical rationale and safety of restaging transurethral resection in indication-stratified patients with high-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
World Journal of Surgical Oncology, January 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12957-018-1310-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Piotr Zapała, Bartosz Dybowski, Sławomir Poletajew, Łukasz Białek, Andrzej Niewczas, Piotr Radziszewski |
| Abstract |
Indications for restaging transurethral resection of the bladder tumor (reTURBT) in patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) remain controversial. This study was aimed at evaluation of clinical value and safety of reTURBT in different clinical indications. This is a retrospective analysis of consecutive 141 patients who underwent TURBT followed by reTURBT in years 2011-2015 in a single department. Pathological results and surgical complications were analyzed in the whole study cohort and stratified by clinical stage (Ta, T1, Tx (no muscle in the specimen)) and grade (low-grade (LG), high-grade (HG)) of bladder cancer diagnosed at primary TURBT. Full data was available for 132 patients. Residual disease was found in 53 patients (40.2%) with highest rate for Ta-HG cases (57.1%) followed by T1-HG (51.4%), Tx-HG (45.2%), T1-LG (32.1%), and Tx-LG (25.8%). In the multivariate analysis, high grade (p = 0.02) was the only independent predictor of residual disease. Upstaging to muscle-invasive bladder cancer was noticed in 9 patients (6.8%). The rate of grade ≥ 2 Clavien-Dindo complications (1.5 vs. 5.3%) did not differ significantly between TURBT and reTURBT cases. ReTURBT is a safe procedure that remains crucial for therapeutic and staging purposes in patients with T1, Tx, or high-grade bladder cancer found in the primary resection. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Poland | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 21 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 4 | 19% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 10% |
| Professor | 1 | 5% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 3 | 14% |
| Unknown | 6 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 52% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 10% |
| Engineering | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 7 | 33% |
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 16 January 2018.
All research outputs
#13,886,942
of 23,016,919 outputs
Outputs from World Journal of Surgical Oncology
#406
of 2,055 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#244,470
of 473,640 outputs
Outputs of similar age from World Journal of Surgical Oncology
#12
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,016,919 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,055 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% 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 473,640 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 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 57% of its contemporaries.