↓ Skip to main content

A rare case of IgG4-related disease: a gastric mass, associated with regional lymphadenopathy

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Surgery, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
27 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
A rare case of IgG4-related disease: a gastric mass, associated with regional lymphadenopathy
Published in
BMC Surgery, June 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12893-016-0151-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dimitar Bulanov, Elena Arabadzhieva, Sasho Bonev, Atanas Yonkov, Diana Kyoseva, Tihomir Dikov, Violeta Dimitrova

Abstract

IgG4-related disease (IgG4-RD) is a newly recognized disorder, characterized by massive IgG4+ lymphocyte and plasma cell infiltration, storiform fibrosis, causing enlargement, nodules or thickening of the various organs, simultaneously or metachronously. Involvement of the gastrointestinal tract is very rare and can be presented as a diffuse wall thickening or polyp or mass-like lesion. Up to now, there have been reported only a few cases of isolated gastric IgG4-RD. We present an unusual case of IgG4-RD of the stomach with involvement of the regional lymph nodes, clinically manifested as a gastric cancer with related pyloric stenosis. The patient underwent distal gastrectomy, omentectomy and lymph node dissection. The postoperative serum IgG4 level was increased. The diagnosis was confirmed by immunohistochemical study. In the most of the reported cases there was not sufficient data about the regional lymph nodal status, although the majority of the patients had been operated with presumptive diagnosis of gastric neoplasm. Our case is rare and valuable because it presents a gastric IgG4-related lesion larger than all previously reported in literature, and IgG4-related lymphadenopathy, confirmed histologically, which contributes to better knowledge of the disease.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users 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 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 %
Other 5 19%
Researcher 4 15%
Student > Bachelor 3 11%
Student > Postgraduate 3 11%
Professor 1 4%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 9 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 59%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 4%
Unknown 9 33%
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 04 June 2016.
All research outputs
#18,461,618
of 22,875,477 outputs
Outputs from BMC Surgery
#616
of 1,322 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#254,892
of 339,291 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Surgery
#15
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,875,477 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 1,322 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.8. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 339,291 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.