↓ Skip to main content

Pulmonary Kaposi’s sarcoma in a female patient: Case report

Overview of attention for article published in Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
23 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Pulmonary Kaposi’s sarcoma in a female patient: Case report
Published in
Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira, August 2016
DOI 10.1590/1806-9282.62.05.395
Pubmed ID
Authors

Natacha Calheiros de Lima Petribu, Mayana Silva Cisneiros, Glauber Barbosa de Carvalho, Lucyana de Melo Baptista

Abstract

Kaposi's sarcoma (KS) is a multicentric lymphoproliferative malignancy. Most of the time this tumor is confined to the skin and subcutaneous tissue, but it can present with widespread visceral involvement, such as in the lung. Pulmonary KS is the most frequent form in young adult males, in a ratio of 15:1. The disease usually affects individuals with low CD4 lymphocyte counts (<150-200 cells/mm3). We report a case of a female patient aged 35 years, with the presence of skin lesions, self-limiting episodes of diarrhea and weight loss of 15 kg for nearly 9 months, progressing to persistent fever. AIDS was diagnosed and biopsy of the lesions revealed Kaposi's sarcoma. Computed tomography of the chest showed peribronchovascular thickening, areas of ground glass opacity, condensations with air bronchograms surrounded by ground glass opacity (halo sign) and bilateral pleural effusion. The diagnosis of pulmonary KS is still a challenge, especially due to the occurrence of other opportunistic diseases that may also occur concurrently. Therefore, suspecting this diagnosis based on clinical and laboratory manifestations, and even more with CT findings, is fundamental, especially in patients who already have the cutaneous form of the disease.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 23 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 26%
Researcher 4 17%
Student > Bachelor 3 13%
Other 2 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 9%
Other 3 13%
Unknown 3 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 78%
Psychology 1 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 4%
Unknown 3 13%
Attention Score in Context

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 14 April 2017.
All research outputs
#20,655,488
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira
#647
of 1,105 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#299,478
of 381,020 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira
#12
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 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 1,105 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.7. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% 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 381,020 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.