| Title |
Uterine fibroid therapy using interventional radiology mini-invasive treatments: current perspective
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Medical Oncology, February 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12032-017-0906-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Carlo Masciocchi, Francesco Arrigoni, Fabiana Ferrari, Aldo Victor Giordano, Sonia Iafrate, Ilaria Capretti, Ester Cannizzaro, Alfonso Reginelli, Anna Maria Ierardi, Chiara Floridi, Alessio Salvatore Angileri, Luca Brunese, Antonio Barile |
| Abstract |
Uterine fibroids are common benign tumors of unclear etiopathology that affect the female reproductive tract. They are responsible for considerable morbidity and deterioration of life quality, and may have a negative impact on the reproductive system as well. Besides surgery aided by uterus-saving techniques, several minimally invasive procedures are now available within the field of interventional radiology that represent a valid solution for women who desire pregnancy and relief from disease-specific symptomatology. The main advantages offered by these techniques are low grade of invasiveness and short times of hospitalization. The most diffuse techniques are uterine artery embolization (UAE) and magnetic resonance-guided high-intensity focused ultrasound (MRgFUS). UAE is an endovascular procedure whose goal is obtained by provoking ischemia of the uterine vessels. MRgFUS is a thermoablation procedure that selectively ablates the symptomatic fibroids. In this review study, both procedures will be described, including a description of technical details, indications, contraindications, complications, and outcomes. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 64 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 64 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Postgraduate | 12 | 19% |
| Other | 10 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 11% |
| Researcher | 5 | 8% |
| Professor | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 8 | 13% |
| Unknown | 19 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 29 | 45% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 2 | 3% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 3% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 7 | 11% |
| Unknown | 21 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 08 March 2017.
All research outputs
#13,850,939
of 22,958,253 outputs
Outputs from Medical Oncology
#539
of 1,301 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#167,871
of 311,651 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Medical Oncology
#14
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,958,253 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,301 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% 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 311,651 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% 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 has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.