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 |
Image-guided percutaneous renal cryoablation for stage 1 renal cell carcinoma with high surgical risk
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
World Journal of Surgical Oncology, June 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12957-015-0610-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Xiang Yan, Mingxin Zhang, Xiaoxiang Chen, Wang Wei, Rong Yang, Yang Yang, Weidong Gan, Hongqian Guo, Yang Wang, Guo-Ping Shi |
| Abstract |
This study was undertaken to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and therapeutic effects of percutaneous renal cryoablation under local anesthesia with conscious sedation for patients who have unresectable stage 1 (T1NoMo) renal cell carcinoma (RCC) in high surgical risk. Eighteen patients who were not candidates for surgery underwent primary cryosurgery guided by gray-scale ultrasound. Contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS) and contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) were performed to evaluate treatment at completion. The mean follow-up period was 26.8 months (range, 12-56 months). All tumors were biopsied before cryosurgery. Seventeen tumors remained free of enhancement during follow-up period. No major complications associated with cryoablation procedures were found though two instances of subcapsular hematomas, one of retroperitoneal errhysis and one of nausea, were seen after cryoablation. One patient had a local recurrence of tumor and received additional cryoablation. Local tumor control rate was 100 % of T1NoMo tumors including the recurrence case who underwent additional cryoablation. Percutaneous cryoablation can be recommended as a feasible, safe, and promising therapy for the treatment of renal tumor, especially those unresectable stage 1 RCC, with a low risk of complications. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 22 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 4 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 13% |
| Researcher | 3 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 9% |
| Other | 4 | 17% |
| Unknown | 4 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 43% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 4% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 9% |
| Unknown | 7 | 30% |
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 10 June 2015.
All research outputs
#18,414,796
of 22,811,321 outputs
Outputs from World Journal of Surgical Oncology
#1,011
of 2,043 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#192,381
of 266,634 outputs
Outputs of similar age from World Journal of Surgical Oncology
#27
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,811,321 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 2,043 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.1. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% 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 266,634 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 50 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.