↓ Skip to main content

Robotic pyelolithotomy in a congenital pelvic kidney: side docking and robotic prostatectomy port - site approach

Overview of attention for article published in International Brazilian Journal of Urology, January 2017
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 (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
13 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
Robotic pyelolithotomy in a congenital pelvic kidney: side docking and robotic prostatectomy port - site approach
Published in
International Brazilian Journal of Urology, January 2017
DOI 10.1590/s1677-5538.ibju.2016.0059
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rawan Al-Yousef, Ahmad Almarzouq, Saad Aldousari

Abstract

Ectopic pelvic kidneys with renal stones are challenging to treat. We report our experience in managing a case of ectopic pelvic kidney with a pelvic stone by robotic pyelolithotomy after failure of flexible ure¬teroscopy. A 46-year old male with 2 months history of vague lower abdominal pain was found to have on Computed Tomography scan a left ectopic pelvic kidney with a 12mm stone in an anomalous renal pelvis. Flexible ureteroscopy failed to reach the stone twice and a 4.7 French ureteric stent was placed. Side docking was utilized with the patient in supine Trendelenburg position. Port placements were similar to robotic assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. Docking time was 35 minutes and console time was 150 minutes. Multiple attempts failed to follow the course of the ureter to the renal pelvis. Subsequently the renal pelvis was directly opened through the mesocolon and a flexible cystoscope was used to basket the stone out. Estimated Blood Loss was < 100ml. The patient was discharged 2 days postoperatively. Robotic pyelolithotomy is safe and feasible for management of ectopic pelvic kidneys with pelvic stones. The use of flexible cystoscopy helped in localizing and extracting the stone in our case. Detailed understanding of patient's anatomy helps in the success of this procedure.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Egypt 1 8%
Unknown 12 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 2 15%
Student > Master 2 15%
Other 2 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 8%
Unknown 6 46%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 3 23%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 15%
Unknown 8 62%
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 23 August 2017.
All research outputs
#16,051,091
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from International Brazilian Journal of Urology
#317
of 726 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#242,103
of 421,675 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Brazilian Journal of Urology
#19
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% 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 has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% 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 421,675 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 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 57% of its contemporaries.