↓ Skip to main content

Leiomyosarcoma of the inferior vena cava level II involvement: curative resection and reconstruction of renal veins

Overview of attention for article published in World Journal of Surgical Oncology, June 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
16 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
Leiomyosarcoma of the inferior vena cava level II involvement: curative resection and reconstruction of renal veins
Published in
World Journal of Surgical Oncology, June 2012
DOI 10.1186/1477-7819-10-120
Pubmed ID
Authors

Quan Wang, Jing Jiang, Chao Wang, Guodong Lian, Mei-Shan Jin, Xueyuan Cao

Abstract

Leiomyosarcoma of the inferior vena cava (IVCL) is a rare retroperitoneal tumor. We report two cases of level II (middle level, renal veins to hepatic veins) IVCL, who underwent en bloc resection with reconstruction of bilateral or left renal venous return using prosthetic grafts. In our cases, IVCL is documented to be occluded preoperatively, therefore, radical resection of tumor and/or right kidney was performed and the distal end of inferior vena cava was resected and without caval reconstruction. None of the patients developed edema or acute renal failure postoperatively. After surgical resection, adjuvant radiation therapy was administrated. The patients have been free of recurrence 2 years and 3 months, 9 months after surgery, respectively, indicating the complete surgical resection and radiotherapy contribute to the better survival. The reconstruction of inferior vena cava was not considered mandatory in level II IVCL, if the retroperitoneal venous collateral pathways have been established. In addition to the curative resection of IVCL, the renal vascular reconstruction minimized the risks of procedure-related acute renal failure, and was more physiologically preferable. This concept was reflected in the treatment of the two patients reported on.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 1 6%
Unknown 15 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 4 25%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 25%
Student > Bachelor 2 13%
Student > Master 2 13%
Student > Postgraduate 2 13%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 1 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 81%
Arts and Humanities 1 6%
Engineering 1 6%
Unknown 1 6%
Attention Score in Context

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 28 June 2012.
All research outputs
#18,309,495
of 22,669,724 outputs
Outputs from World Journal of Surgical Oncology
#1,022
of 2,038 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#126,446
of 164,434 outputs
Outputs of similar age from World Journal of Surgical Oncology
#22
of 72 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,669,724 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 2,038 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.0. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 164,434 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 72 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.