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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Comparison of the indocyanine green dye method versus the combined method of indigo carmine blue dye with indocyanine green fluorescence imaging for sentinel lymph node biopsy in breast conservative therapy for stage ≤IIA breast cancer
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Women's Health, September 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12905-018-0646-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Nobuyuki Takemoto, Ai Koyanagi, Masanori Yasuda, Hiroshi Yamamoto |
| Abstract |
Fluorescence imaging (FI) is one of the methods to identify sentinel lymph nodes (SLNs). However, the procedure is technically complicated and requires procedural skills, as SLN biopsy must be conducted in dim light conditions. As an improved version of this method, we introduced a combined method (Combined mixed dye and fluorescence; CMF) consisting of indigo carmine blue dye and FI. The direct visualization of SLNs under shadowless surgical light conditions is facilitated by the addition of the blue dye. We compared the SLN detection rates of CMF with that of the indocyanine green (ICG) dye method (ICG-D). A total of 202 patients with stage ≤IIA breast cancer who underwent breast conservative therapy with separate incision from January 2004 to February 2017 were reviewed. Details of the two methods are as follows: (1) ICG-D: 10 mg of ICG was used and the green-stained SLNs were resected via a 3-4 cm axillary incision; (2) CMF: A combination of 5 mg of ICG and 4-8 mg of indigo carmine was used. After a 1.5-2 cm incision was made near the point of disappearance of the fluorescence using Photodynamic Eye (PDE), the blue-stained SLNs were resected under shadowless surgical light conditions. There were 92 ICG-D and 110 CMF cases. CMF resulted in a significantly higher SLN detection rate than ICG-D (96.4% vs. 83.7%; p = 0.003). This difference was particularly notable in those aged ≥60 years (98.3% vs. 74.3%) and individuals with body mass index (BMI) ≥25 kg/m2 (90.3% vs. 58.3%). CMF is an effective method to identify SLNs which is safe and efficient. CMF achieves a high SLN identification rate and most of this procedure is feasible under shadowless surgical light conditions. CMF can reliably perform SLN biopsy even in those aged ≥60 years and individuals with BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 27 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 6 | 22% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 15% |
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 3 | 11% |
| Unknown | 8 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 14 | 52% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 1 | 4% |
| Psychology | 1 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 8 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 September 2018.
All research outputs
#5,833,086
of 23,103,903 outputs
Outputs from BMC Women's Health
#590
of 1,864 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#102,692
of 341,703 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Women's Health
#28
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,103,903 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,864 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 341,703 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 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 40 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.