↓ Skip to main content

Castleman disease mimicked pancreatic carcinoma: report of two cases

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

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
9 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
Castleman disease mimicked pancreatic carcinoma: report of two cases
Published in
World Journal of Surgical Oncology, July 2012
DOI 10.1186/1477-7819-10-154
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hua Guo, Yan Shen, Wei-Lin Wang, Min Zhang, Hong Li, Ying-Sheng Wu, Sheng Yan, Xiao Xu, Jian Wu, Shu-Sen Zheng

Abstract

Castleman disease (CD) is an uncommon benign lymphoproliferative disorder, which usually presents as solitary or multiple masses in the mediastinum. Peripancreatic CD was rarely reported. Herein, we report two cases of unicentric peripancreatic CD from our center. A 43-year-old man and a 58-year-old woman were detected to have a pancreatic mass in the routine medical examinations. Both of them were asymptomatic. The computed tomography and ultrasonographic examination revealed a mild enhancing solitary mass at the pancreatic head/neck. No definite preoperative diagnosis was established and Whipple operations were originally planned. The intraoperative frozen section diagnosis of both patients revealed lymphoproliferation. Then the local excisions of mass were performed. Histological examination revealed features of CD of hyaline-vascular type. No recurrence was found during the follow-up period. CD should be included in the differential diagnosis of pancreatic tumors. Local excision is a suitable surgical choice.

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 9 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 9 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 2 22%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 11%
Other 1 11%
Unknown 3 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 56%
Chemistry 1 11%
Unknown 3 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 23 July 2012.
All research outputs
#18,310,549
of 22,671,366 outputs
Outputs from World Journal of Surgical Oncology
#1,022
of 2,038 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#125,924
of 164,297 outputs
Outputs of similar age from World Journal of Surgical Oncology
#27
of 70 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,671,366 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 164,297 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 70 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.