| Title |
Assessment of paraspinal neurogenic tumors with diffusion-weighted MR imaging
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Spine Journal, August 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00586-017-5265-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ahmed Abdel Khalek Abdel Razek, Germeen Albair Ashmalla |
| Abstract |
To assess paraspinal neurogenic tumors with diffusion-weighted MR imaging. Retrospective analysis was done upon 34 patients with paraspinal neurogenic tumors that underwent diffusion-weighted MR imaging. The ADC values of the mediastinal neurogenic tumors were calculated and correlated with biopsy results. The ADC of benign paraspinal neurogenic tumors (1.5 ± 0.28 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s) was significantly higher (P = 0.001) than that of malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumors (0.995 ± 0.198 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s). Selection of 1.15 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s as a cut-off point for differentiating malignant from benign neurogenic tumors revealed an area under the curve of 0.885, an accuracy of 91.1%, a sensitivity of 90.9%, and specificity of 91.3%. There was significant difference (P = 0.04) in the ADC of schwannomas (1.55 ± 0.29 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s) from neurofibromas (1.33 ± 0.08 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s). The cut-off ADC value of 1.44 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s was used to differentiate schwannomas and neurofibromas with an area under the curve of 0.86, an accuracy of 82.6%, a sensitivity of 100%, and a specificity of 76.5%. Diffusion-weighted MR imaging is imaging parameter that can be used for differentiation of benign from malignant paraspinal neurogenic tumors. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 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 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 15 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 5 | 33% |
| Other | 3 | 20% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 7% |
| Professor | 1 | 7% |
| Researcher | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 4 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 40% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 8 | 53% |
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 27 March 2018.
All research outputs
#18,569,430
of 22,999,744 outputs
Outputs from European Spine Journal
#2,502
of 4,662 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#244,387
of 318,830 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Spine Journal
#29
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,999,744 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 4,662 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 318,830 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 40 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.