↓ Skip to main content

Intra-esophageal whitish mass – a challenging diagnosis

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Gastroenterology, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Readers on

mendeley
11 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
Intra-esophageal whitish mass – a challenging diagnosis
Published in
BMC Gastroenterology, August 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12876-015-0335-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lidia Ciobanu, Oliviu Pascu, Marcel Tantau, Oana Pinzariu, Bogdan Furnea, Emil Botan, Marian Taulescu

Abstract

Whitish intraluminal esophageal masses might represent the endoscopic feature of a bezoar or a pedunculated tumor, most likely a fibrovascular polyp, without exclusion of other mesenchymal tumors (leiomyoma, lipoma, gastrointestinal stromal tumor, leiomyosarcoma, granular cell tumor). If a process of dystrophic calcification is also encountered the differential diagnosis can be a challenge even after histological analysis, as it is highlighted by our case. A 65-year-old female whom took lactate calcium tablets for 5 years presented with progressive dysphagia. A whitish esophageal mass with an appearance of a pharmacobezoar was detected at esophagoscopy. A pedunculated tumor was considered in the differential diagnosis, but the imagistic studies ruled out a pedicle. This intraluminal esophageal mass highly suggestive for a pharmacobezoar was endoscopically removed. The challenge of correct diagnosis was raised by histological examination performed after immersion into trichloracetic acid for decalcification. The identification of hyaline fibrous tissue, with numerous crystalline basophils deposits of minerals, rare fibrocytes and very few vessels brought in discussion a mesenchymal originating mass, most likely a fibrovascular polyp, even the pedicle was not detected. Based on our challenging and difficult to diagnose case we proposed an uncommon evolution: auto-amputation and calcification of an esophageal mesenchymal originating tumor (most likely a fibrovascular polyp).

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 11 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 11 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 2 18%
Student > Bachelor 2 18%
Other 1 9%
Librarian 1 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 9%
Other 1 9%
Unknown 3 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 4 36%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 9%
Psychology 1 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 9%
Unknown 4 36%

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 August 2015.
All research outputs
#3,931,879
of 5,561,865 outputs
Outputs from BMC Gastroenterology
#463
of 631 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#132,568
of 192,234 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Gastroenterology
#39
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 5,561,865 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 631 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.3. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% 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 192,234 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.