↓ Skip to main content

Benign orbital angiomatous tumors with intracranial extension

Overview of attention for article published in European Journal of Medical Research, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
12 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
Benign orbital angiomatous tumors with intracranial extension
Published in
European Journal of Medical Research, August 2015
DOI 10.1186/s40001-015-0157-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Konrad R Koch, Mario Matthaei, Stefan J Grau, Tobias Blau, Edwin Bölke, Ole Schlichting, Claus Cursiefen, Ludwig M Heindl

Abstract

Orbital neoplasms with associated bone erosions and intracranial extension are generally considered suspicious for malignancies. Here, we describe the clinical and radiological findings, as well as the surgical management of two extraordinary cases, in which such bony perforations with subsequent intracranial tumor growth resulted from benign angiomatous orbital neoplasms. Two female patients, 69 years old (case 1) and 51 years old (case 2), had both developed visual symptoms (visual field restrictions and/or visual acuity loss) over several months. Computed tomography revealed an orbital tumor of the anterosuperior orbit with painless swelling of the medial upper eyelid of the right eye in case 1, and a posterior intraconal tumor close to the orbital apex of the left eye in case 2, respectively. In both cases, the tumor was associated with a perforation of the orbital roof connecting the orbit with the anterior cranial fossa. An interdisciplinary ophthalmologic and neurosurgical approach allowed for complete tumor removal, in both patients with no signs for local recurrence during the subsequent follow-up of 15 and 18 months, respectively, as well as for a satisfactory visual rehabilitation.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 12 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 12 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 3 25%
Professor 2 17%
Other 1 8%
Student > Bachelor 1 8%
Researcher 1 8%
Other 1 8%
Unknown 3 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 42%
Neuroscience 2 17%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 8%
Unknown 4 33%
Attention Score in Context

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 12 November 2015.
All research outputs
#17,235,172
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Medical Research
#436
of 923 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#164,855
of 276,260 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Medical Research
#3
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 923 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% 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 276,260 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 6 of them.