↓ Skip to main content

Laparoscopic resection of tumor recurrence after radical nephrectomy for localized renal cell carcinoma

Overview of attention for article published in International Brazilian Journal of Urology, June 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
14 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
Laparoscopic resection of tumor recurrence after radical nephrectomy for localized renal cell carcinoma
Published in
International Brazilian Journal of Urology, June 2014
DOI 10.1590/s1677-5538.ibju.2014.03.21
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lessandro Curcio, Antonio Claudio Cunha, Juan Renteria, Daniel Presto

Abstract

Introduction: Local recurrence of Renal Cell Carcinoma (RCC) after radical nephrectomy is a rare event. Some known risk factors are: clinical/pathological stage, locorregional disease and lyimph node positivity. Since up to 30-40% of patients can achieve a disease-free status, we show a case (video) in which we performed a laparoscopic excision of a local RCC, taking advantage of all the well-known benefits of laparoscopy. Case report: A 56 years old female with a history of open radical nephrectomy two years before was diagnosed with a mass at the time of surveillance CT imaging during follow-up. The suspected local recurrence was 12cm, and vascularized predominantly by tributaries originating from the iliac vessels. There was no other site of disease (i.e. brain, lung, liver, bones) and laboratory tests were normal. Laparoscopic approach was approached, by inserting 4 trocars (2 of 10 and 2 of 5mm) with the patient in the lateral position. Result: The procedure lasted 130 minutes, with 220mL of estimated bleeding; the larger vessels were ligated with polymer clips (Hem-o-lok) and the smaller handled by ultrasonic clamp. The specimen was removed by a small incision below the umbilicus in an appropriate bag. The patient was feed in the first postoperative day and discharged on the third day. Histopathology revealed sarcoma, with a high degree of mitosis, and negative surgical margins. She was referred to medical oncology for adjuvant therapy consideration. Conclusion: The laparoscopic resection of recurrent tumor should be encouraged in highly selected cases. The minimally invasive method, with its known advantages, especially for more debilitated patients, can be advantageous when applied to suitable cases.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users 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 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 14 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 36%
Researcher 2 14%
Student > Bachelor 1 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 7%
Other 1 7%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 36%
Computer Science 1 7%
Arts and Humanities 1 7%
Chemistry 1 7%
Engineering 1 7%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 5 36%
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 27 February 2015.
All research outputs
#20,674,485
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from International Brazilian Journal of Urology
#469
of 726 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#176,923
of 241,031 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Brazilian Journal of Urology
#7
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 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 726 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% 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 241,031 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.