↓ Skip to main content

Stasis Dermatitis: Pathophysiology, Evaluation, and Management

Overview of attention for article published in American Journal of Clinical Dermatology, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
twitter
5 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
81 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
147 Mendeley
Title
Stasis Dermatitis: Pathophysiology, Evaluation, and Management
Published in
American Journal of Clinical Dermatology, January 2017
DOI 10.1007/s40257-016-0250-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Swaminathan Sundaresan, Michael R. Migden, Sirunya Silapunt

Abstract

Stasis dermatitis commonly occurs in older age. It is caused by venous hypertension resulting from retrograde flow due to incompetent venous valves, valve destruction, or obstruction of the venous system. Further tissue changes arise from an inflammatory process mediated by metalloproteinases, which are up-regulated by ferric ion from extravasated red blood cells. Stasis dermatitis presents initially as poorly demarcated erythematous plaques of the lower legs bilaterally, classically involving the medial malleolus. It is one of the spectrum of cutaneous findings that may result from chronic venous insufficiency. Its mimics include cellulitis, contact dermatitis, and pigmented purpuric dermatoses. Duplex ultrasound is useful in demonstrating venous reflux when the clinical diagnosis of stasis dermatitis is inadequate. Conservative treatment involves the use of compression therapy directed at improving ambulatory venous pressure. Interventional therapy currently includes minimally invasive techniques such as endovenous thermal ablation and ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy, which have supplanted the use of open 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 147 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 147 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 26 18%
Other 13 9%
Researcher 13 9%
Student > Postgraduate 10 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 6%
Other 21 14%
Unknown 55 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 70 48%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 1%
Other 3 2%
Unknown 56 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 24. 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 31 January 2024.
All research outputs
#1,639,570
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from American Journal of Clinical Dermatology
#111
of 1,083 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#32,741
of 428,424 outputs
Outputs of similar age from American Journal of Clinical Dermatology
#3
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,083 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 428,424 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.