↓ Skip to main content

Laparoscopic low anterior resection for rectal cancer with rectal prolapse: a case report

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Medical Case Reports, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
19 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
Laparoscopic low anterior resection for rectal cancer with rectal prolapse: a case report
Published in
Journal of Medical Case Reports, February 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13256-017-1555-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ryusei Yamamoto, Yasuji Mokuno, Hideo Matsubara, Hirokazu Kaneko, Shinsuke Iyomasa

Abstract

Rectal cancer with rectal prolapse is rare, described by only a few case reports. Recently, laparoscopic surgery has become standard procedure for either rectal cancer or rectal prolapse. However, the use of laparoscopic low anterior resection for rectal cancer with rectal prolapse has not been reported. A 63-year-old Japanese woman suffered from rectal prolapse, with a mass and rectal bleeding for 2 years. An examination revealed complete rectal prolapse and the presence of a soft tumor, 7 cm in diameter; the distance from the anal verge to the tumor was 5 cm. Colonoscopy demonstrated a large villous tumor in the lower rectum, which was diagnosed as adenocarcinoma on biopsy. We performed laparoscopic low anterior resection using the prolapsing technique without rectopexy. The distal surgical margin was more than 1.5 cm from the tumor. There were no major perioperative complications. Twelve months after surgery, our patient is doing well with no evidence of recurrence of either the rectal prolapse or the cancer, and she has not suffered from either fecal incontinence or constipation. Laparoscopic low anterior resection without rectopexy can be an appropriate surgical procedure for rectal cancer with rectal prolapse. The prolapsing technique is useful in selected patients.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 19 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 3 16%
Student > Bachelor 2 11%
Other 2 11%
Student > Postgraduate 2 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 11%
Other 3 16%
Unknown 5 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 58%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 11%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 5%
Arts and Humanities 1 5%
Unknown 4 21%
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 13 February 2018.
All research outputs
#18,587,406
of 23,023,224 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Medical Case Reports
#2,280
of 3,947 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#327,806
of 437,326 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Medical Case Reports
#47
of 84 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,023,224 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 3,947 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% 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 437,326 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% 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 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.