| Title |
Natural history of intramedullary spinal cord ependymoma in patients preferring nonoperative treatment
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Neuro-Oncology, June 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11060-017-2552-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Bedjan Behmanesh, Florian Gessler, Stephan Dützmann, Daniel Dubinski, Lioba Imoehl, Volker Seifert, Matthias Setzer, Gerhard Marquardt |
| Abstract |
Surgical resection of intramedullary spinal cord ependymoma still remains the standard of care but is challenging and occasionally associated with poor outcome. The aim of this study is therefore to provide additional information regarding the natural history of conservatively treated symptomatic intramedullary spinal cord ependymoma. Retrospective, single center review of all patients with intramedullary spinal cord ependymoma treated conservatively (wait and see) between 1980 and 2016. The neurological outcomes at first presentation, as well as in long-term follow-up, were assessed using the modified McCormick Disability Scale and modified Rankin Scale. Thirteen of 41 patients were managed conservatively and were included in the study. Mean age at the admission was 49 years. There were seven women and six men. All patients were symptomatic at the time of presentation. The mean follow-up from admission to the last neurological examination was 47.9 months. The mean modified McCormick score in conservatively treated patients was 1.3 at admission and 1.6 (p = 0.3) at last follow-up. There was no significant neurological detoriation over time in conservatively managed patients as assessed by the modified Rankin Scale at first presentation and last follow-up (mRS scores of 0-2, 100 vs 92%; p = 0.9). This cohort of conservatively managed patients with symptomatic intramedullary spinal cord ependymoma was clinically stable throughout the follow-up period. Our data provide additional information for counseling patients with intramedullary spinal cord tumors who chose a nonoperative treatment. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 21 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 5 | 23% |
| Researcher | 4 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 14% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 14% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 14% |
| Other | 2 | 9% |
| Unknown | 2 | 9% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 50% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 14% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 7 | 32% |
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 01 July 2017.
All research outputs
#18,558,284
of 22,985,065 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Neuro-Oncology
#2,261
of 2,986 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#240,664
of 314,551 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Neuro-Oncology
#42
of 88 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,985,065 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 2,986 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% 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 314,551 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 88 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.