↓ Skip to main content

The lack of clinical value of peritoneal washing cytology in high risk patients undergoing risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy: a retrospective study and review

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Cancer, January 2016
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 (67th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
20 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
The lack of clinical value of peritoneal washing cytology in high risk patients undergoing risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy: a retrospective study and review
Published in
BMC Cancer, January 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12885-015-2011-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

F. Blok, E. M. Roes, G. J. L. H. van Leenders, H. J. van Beekhuizen

Abstract

To assess the clinical value of peritoneal washing cytology (PWC) in women with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations and women from a family with hereditary breast and/or ovarian cancer (HBOC) undergoing risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) in detecting primary peritoneal cancer (PPC) or occult ovarian/fallopian tube cancer. A retrospective study of patients with known BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation or HBOC who underwent RRSO at the Erasmus Medical Centre, Rotterdam, The Netherlands between January 2000-2014. Patients with an elevated risk of malignancy prior to the procedure were excluded from primary analysis (elevated CA-125, an ovarian mass, abdominal pain or another gynecological malignancy). A review of the literature was conducted. Of the 471 patients who underwent RRSO, a total of 267 cytology samples were available for analysis. Four samples showed malignant cells, all four patients were diagnosed with ovarian and/or fallopian tube cancer at histologic examination. A fifth patient, of whom no cytology sample was obtained during RRSO, developed primary peritoneal cancer 80 months post RRSO. This study failed to show that cytology is of value during RRSO in detecting primary peritoneal cancer, however 36 % of patients with concomitant ovarian or fallopian tube cancer had positive cytology. Therefore, the routine sampling of peritoneal washings during RRSO is not found to be useful to detect subsequent PPC.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 tweeters 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 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 20 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 25%
Student > Postgraduate 3 15%
Researcher 3 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 10%
Student > Master 2 10%
Other 4 20%
Unknown 1 5%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 35%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 20%
Engineering 2 10%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 5%
Physics and Astronomy 1 5%
Other 3 15%
Unknown 2 10%

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 16 January 2016.
All research outputs
#4,364,305
of 8,604,762 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cancer
#1,346
of 3,567 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#156,797
of 326,233 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cancer
#65
of 249 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 8,604,762 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,567 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% 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 326,233 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 249 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.