| Title |
Tenosynovitis caused by Scedosporium apiospermum infection misdiagnosed as an Alternaria species: a case report
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Infectious Diseases, January 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12879-016-2098-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Choon-Mee Kim, Sung-Chul Lim, Joa Kim, Hoe-Soo Jang, Jong-Hun Chung, Na-Ra Yun, Dong-Min Kim, Piyush Jha, Babita Jha, Seok Won Kim, Sook Jin Jang, Jong Hee Shin |
| Abstract |
Scedosporium apiospermum, which can usually be isolated from soil, polluted stream water and decaying vegetation, is increasingly recognized as an opportunistic dematiaceous fungus. The mortality rate of infection in immunocompromised hosts is over 50%. S. apiospermum is commonly responsible for dermal and epidermal infections (i.e., mycetoma) after traumatic penetration. A 73-year-old woman was admitted to our hospital complaining of painful swelling and tenderness on the dorsum of the proximal left wrist and hand. The symptoms had persisted for approximately 2 months. A physical examination revealed a 4 x 3 cm, poorly defined, erythematous papule, which was fluctuant, with pustules and crusts on the dorsum of the left hand. We report a very rare case of tenosynovitis caused by S. apiospermum infection. We identified the infectious agent via molecular DNA sequencing. The infectious agent was initially misidentified as an Alternaria species by microscopic examination with lactophenol cotton blue (LPCB) staining. The infection was successfully treated with debridement and adjuvant fluconazole therapy. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 19 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 4 | 21% |
| Lecturer | 3 | 16% |
| Other | 3 | 16% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 11% |
| Researcher | 2 | 11% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 4 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 32% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 3 | 16% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 11% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 5 | 26% |
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 03 February 2017.
All research outputs
#20,400,885
of 22,950,943 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#6,500
of 7,704 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#357,128
of 421,957 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#137
of 161 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,950,943 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,704 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 421,957 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 161 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.