↓ Skip to main content

Renal vein thrombosis mimicking urinary calculus: a dilemma of diagnosis

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Urology, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#35 of 190)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
6 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
Renal vein thrombosis mimicking urinary calculus: a dilemma of diagnosis
Published in
BMC Urology, July 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12894-015-0054-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yimin Wang, Shanwen Chen, Wei Wang, Jianyong Liu, Baiye Jin

Abstract

Renal vein thrombosis (RVT) with flank pain, and hematuria, is often mistaken with renal colic originating from ureteric or renal calculus. Especially in young and otherwise healthy patients, clinicians are easily misled by clinical presentation and calcified RVT. A 38-year-old woman presented with flank pain and hematuria suggestive of renal calculus on ultrasound. She underwent extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy that failed, leading to the recommendation that percutaneous lithotomy was necessary to remove the renal calculus. In preoperative view of the unusual shape of the calculus without hydronephrosis, noncontrast computed tomography was taken and demonstrated left ureteric calculus. However computed tomography angiography revealed, to our surprise, a calcified RVT that was initially thought to be a urinary calculus. This case shows that a calcified RVT might mimic a urinary calculus on conventional ultrasonography and ureteric calculus on noncontrast computed tomography. Subsequent computed tomography angiography disclosed that a calcified RVT caused the imaging findings, thus creating a potentially dangerous clinical pitfall. Hence, it is suggested that the possibility of a RVT needs to be considered in the differential diagnosis whenever one detects an uncommon shape for a urinary calculus.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 6 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 6 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 1 17%
Student > Bachelor 1 17%
Professor 1 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 17%
Student > Master 1 17%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 1 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 83%
Unknown 1 17%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 20 August 2015.
All research outputs
#1,339,924
of 7,074,934 outputs
Outputs from BMC Urology
#35
of 190 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#51,674
of 221,381 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Urology
#2
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 7,074,934 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 190 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 221,381 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.