| Title |
Surgical Approach to Bone Metastases
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Current Osteoporosis Reports, June 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11914-018-0463-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Geoffrey W. Siegel, J. Sybil Biermann, Anda-Alexandra Calinescu, Daniel E. Spratt, Nicholas J. Szerlip |
| Abstract |
The purpose of this review was to examine the recent changes in the surgical treatment of bone metastases and how the treatment paradigm has shifted with the improvement of adjuvant therapies. How surgery fits into the local and systemic treatment was reviewed for bone metastases in different areas. The more common use of targeted chemotherapies and focused high-dose radiation have altered the treatment paradigm of bone metastases. Overall changes in the surgical treatment of bone metastases have been driven by an increased multidisciplinary approach to metastatic cancer and the awareness that one type of surgery does not work for all patients. The individual patient treatment goals dictate the surgical procedures used to achieve these goals. Advancements in adjuvant therapy-like radiation and more targeted chemotherapies have allowed for less invasive surgical approaches and therefore faster recoveries and reduced surgical morbidity for patients. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 40% |
| Unknown | 3 | 60% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 80% |
| Scientists | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 24 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 6 | 25% |
| Researcher | 4 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 4% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Unknown | 8 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 50% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 4% |
| Materials Science | 1 | 4% |
| Linguistics | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 9 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 09 September 2018.
All research outputs
#7,233,028
of 23,090,520 outputs
Outputs from Current Osteoporosis Reports
#149
of 550 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#123,942
of 328,114 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Osteoporosis Reports
#5
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,090,520 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 550 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 328,114 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 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 64% of its contemporaries.