| Title |
Recognition and treatment of endometriosis involving the sacral nerve roots
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Urogynecology Journal & Pelvic Floor Dysfunction, April 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00192-015-2703-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Nucelio Lemos, Nicolau D’Amico, Renato Marques, Gil Kamergorodsky, Eduardo Schor, Manoel J. B. C. Girão |
| Abstract |
Endometriosis involving the sacral plexus is still poorly understood or neglected by many surgeons. Looking at that scenario, we have designed this educational video to explain and describe the symptoms suggestive of endometriotic involvement of the sacral plexus in addition to the technique for the laparoscopic treatment of this condition. Retrospective analysis of 13 consecutive cases of endometriotic entrapment of nerves of the lumbosacral plexus. Paired t test revealed a statistically significant (p < 0.0000001) reduction in pain VAS score, from preoperative average 9.1 (±1.98) to postoperative 1.46 (±1.66). Twelve out of 13 patients (92.3 %) experienced a reduction of 50 % or more in VAS score and 6 (46.15 %) became completely pain-free. The signs suggestive of intrapelvic nerve involvement include perineal pain or pain irradiating to the lower limbs, lower urinary tract symptoms, tenesmus or dyschezia associated with gluteal pain. Whenever deeply infiltrating lesions are present, the patient must be asked about those symptoms and specific MRI sequences for the sacral plexus must be taken, so that the equipment and team can be arranged and proper treatment performed. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 44 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 11% |
| Researcher | 4 | 9% |
| Other | 9 | 20% |
| Unknown | 11 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 23 | 52% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 2% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 2% |
| Psychology | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 14 | 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 22 April 2016.
All research outputs
#20,655,488
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from International Urogynecology Journal & Pelvic Floor Dysfunction
#2,452
of 2,900 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#207,385
of 279,812 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Urogynecology Journal & Pelvic Floor Dysfunction
#29
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,900 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% 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 279,812 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.