↓ Skip to main content

A rare case of human pulmonary dirofilariasis with nodules mimicking malignancy: approach to diagnosis and treatment

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (65th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
32 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
A rare case of human pulmonary dirofilariasis with nodules mimicking malignancy: approach to diagnosis and treatment
Published in
Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery, June 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13019-018-0750-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Paolo Albino Ferrari, Antonella Grisolia, Stefano Reale, Rosa Liotta, Alessandra Mularoni, Alessandro Bertani

Abstract

Human pulmonary dirofilariasis is a rare zoonosis caused by the dog worm Dirofilaria spp., a parasite transmitted by mosquitos and resulting in peripheral lung nodules. The filarial nematode enters the subcutaneous tissue, travels to the right ventricle and dies causing a small pulmonary infarction that may embolize through the pulmonary vessels and may appear as a solitary nodule. These nodules are usually incidentally identified in asymptomatic patients undergoing chest imaging studies, and are generally interpreted to be malignant. We present the case report of a human dirofilariasis in a patient with multiple pulmonary nodules resected using video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS). According to our literature review, this is the first case with double synchronous lung nodules reported in Italy. Minimally invasive resection with histologic examination may be the best approach for the diagnosis and treatment of pulmonary dirofilariasis. Polymerase Chain Reaction testing may provide a more accurate etiological diagnosis in case of an inconclusive pathology result.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users 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 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 32 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 19%
Student > Bachelor 2 6%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 6%
Lecturer 1 3%
Other 4 13%
Unknown 15 47%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 16%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 4 13%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 6%
Unspecified 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 16 50%
Attention Score in Context

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 07 October 2018.
All research outputs
#6,495,387
of 23,090,520 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery
#112
of 1,251 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#113,645
of 328,264 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery
#3
of 52 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,090,520 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,251 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 328,264 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 52 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.