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 |
Robotic enucleation for pediatric insulinoma with MEN1 syndrome: a case report and literature review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Surgery, June 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12893-018-0376-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mei Liang, Jialin Jiang, Hongmei Dai, Xiafei Hong, Xianlin Han, Lin Cong, Anli Tong, Fang Li, Yaping Luo, Weinan Liu, Liangrui Zhou, Wenyu Di, Wenming Wu, Yupei Zhao |
| Abstract |
A patient with a rare pediatric insulinoma and MEN1 syndrome was treated by robotic enucleation surgery. We present a case of a 9-year-old girl presenting with repeated loss of consciousness, concomitant with a pale face, palpitations, and convulsions, which had persisted for 2 years and had been aggravated during the previous 2 months. She was previously misdiagnosed with epilepsy in another hospital. We further examined her while she was hospitalized. By combining her medical history and imaging examination and lab test results, a diagnosis of insulinoma was confirmed. Sanger-directed sequencing on a peripheral blood sample revealed an MEN1 gene mutation, indicating pediatric insulinoma with MEN1 syndrome. The patient underwent minimally invasive insulinoma enucleation surgery under the Da Vinci robot-assisted system with intraoperative ultrasound (IOUS) connected. The surgery was successfully completed within 65 min, and the girl recovered well postoperatively and no longer experienced symptoms of hypoglycemia. This is the first report of a case of pediatric insulinoma treated using robotic enucleation. This experience demonstrates the feasibility and safety of combining robotic surgery with the enucleation procedure as an excellent strategy for pediatric insulinoma. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 42 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 19% |
| Researcher | 5 | 12% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 7% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 4 | 10% |
| Unknown | 16 | 38% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 16 | 38% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 2% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 2% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 4 | 10% |
| Unknown | 17 | 40% |
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 19 June 2018.
All research outputs
#18,639,173
of 23,090,520 outputs
Outputs from BMC Surgery
#630
of 1,340 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#252,990
of 328,030 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Surgery
#17
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,090,520 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 1,340 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.8. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% 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 328,030 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.