↓ Skip to main content

Perineostomy: the last oportunity

Overview of attention for article published in International Brazilian Journal of Urology, January 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (59th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
f1000
1 research highlight platform

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
21 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
Perineostomy: the last oportunity
Published in
International Brazilian Journal of Urology, January 2015
DOI 10.1590/s1677-5538.ibju.2015.01.13
Pubmed ID
Authors

Juan Carlos Regueiro Lopez, Enrique Gomez Gomez, Alberto Alonso Carrillo, Roque Cano Castineira, Maria Jose Requena Tapia

Abstract

To review the technique and outcome of perineal urethrostomy or urethral perineostomy and to identify factors related to the procedure failure. We studied 17 patients who underwent perineal urethrostomy between 2009-2013 in a single hospital. Success was defined as no need for additional surgical treatment or urethral dilatation. We reviewed the clinical data related to age, weight, previous urethral surgery, diabetes, hypertension, ischemic cardiopathy, lichen sclerosus and other causes and studied their association with the procedure failure (univariate analysis). We completed the analysis with a multivariate test based on binary regression. The average follow-up was 39.41 months. From all the causes, we found Lichen Sclerosus in 35 %, idiopathic etiology in 29 % and prior hypospadia repair in 18 %. Postoperative failure occurred in 3 patients, with a final success of 82.4 %. The binary regression model showed as independent risk factors ischemic cardiopathy (OR: 2.34), and the presence of Lichen Sclerosis (OR: 3.21). The success rate with the perineal urethrostomy technique shows it to be a valid option above all when we preserve the urethral blood supply and plate. Lichen sclerosus and ischemic vascular problems are risk factors to re-stenosis.

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 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 21 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 29%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 14%
Other 2 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 10%
Lecturer 2 10%
Other 3 14%
Unknown 3 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 71%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 5%
Environmental Science 1 5%
Unknown 4 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 01 October 2023.
All research outputs
#15,493,002
of 25,867,969 outputs
Outputs from International Brazilian Journal of Urology
#299
of 733 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#188,635
of 361,782 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Brazilian Journal of Urology
#24
of 59 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,867,969 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 733 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% 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 361,782 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 59 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 59% of its contemporaries.