↓ Skip to main content

Laparoscopic repair of a lumbar hernia: report of a case and extensive review of the literature

Overview of attention for article published in Surgical Endoscopy, April 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
63 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
42 Mendeley
Title
Laparoscopic repair of a lumbar hernia: report of a case and extensive review of the literature
Published in
Surgical Endoscopy, April 2013
DOI 10.1007/s00464-013-2884-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sebastian Suarez, Juan D. Hernandez

Abstract

Lumbar hernias are a protrusion of intra-abdominal contents through a weakness or rupture in the posterior abdominal wall. They are considered to be a rare entity with approximately 300 cases reported in the literature since it was first described by Barbette in 1672. Petit described the inferior lumbar triangle in 1783 and Grynfeltt described the superior lumbar triangle in 1866; both are anatomical boundaries where 95% of lumbar hernias occur, whereas the other 5% are considered to be diffuse. Twenty percent of lumbar hernias are congenital and the other 80% are acquired; the acquired lumbar hernias can be further classified into either primary (spontaneous) or secondary. The typical presentation of lumbar hernias is a patient with a protruding semispherical bulge in the back with a slow growth. However, they may present with an incarcerated or strangulated bowel, so it is recommended that all lumbar hernias must be repaired as soon as they are diagnosed. The "gold standard" for diagnosing a lumbar hernia is a CT scan, because it is able to delineate muscular and fascial layers, detect a defect in one or more of these layers, evaluate the presence of herniated contents, differentiate muscle atrophy from a real hernia, and serve as a useful tool in the differential diagnosis, such as tumors. Recent studies have demonstrated the advantages of a laparoscopic repair instead of the classic open approach as the ideal treatment option for lumbar hernias. We report a case of a spontaneous lumbar hernia initially diagnosed as a lipoma and corrected with the open approach, but after relapsing 2 years later it was corrected using a laparoscopic approach. It is followed by an extensive review of lumbar hernias literature regarding history, anatomy, and surgical techniques.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 41 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 12%
Other 4 10%
Researcher 4 10%
Student > Postgraduate 4 10%
Student > Bachelor 3 7%
Other 10 24%
Unknown 12 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 60%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 2%
Unknown 14 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 15 October 2013.
All research outputs
#13,151,646
of 22,708,120 outputs
Outputs from Surgical Endoscopy
#2,737
of 6,006 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#99,571
of 192,344 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Surgical Endoscopy
#29
of 85 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,708,120 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,006 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% 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 192,344 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 85 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 63% of its contemporaries.