↓ Skip to main content

Kidney collecting system anatomy applied to endourology - a narrative review

Overview of attention for article published in International Brazilian Journal of Urology, April 2024
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
1 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
Kidney collecting system anatomy applied to endourology - a narrative review
Published in
International Brazilian Journal of Urology, April 2024
DOI 10.1590/s1677-5538.ibju.2024.9901
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ana Raquel M. Morais, Luciano A. Favorito, Francisco J. B. Sampaio

Abstract

To evaluate the surgical anatomy of the kidney collecting system through a narrative review of the literature, highlighting its importance during diagnosis and its approach during surgical procedures for the treatment of renal stones. We carried out a review about the anatomy of the kidney collecting system. We analyzed papers published in the past 40 years in the databases Pubmed, Embase and Scielo, and we included only papers in English and excluded case reports, editorials and opinions of specialists. Renal collecting system could be divided in four groups: A1 - kidney midzone (KM), drained by minor calyx that are dependent on the superior or the inferior caliceal groups; A2 - KM drained by crossed calyx, one draining into the superior caliceal group and another draining into the inferior caliceal group; B1 - KM drained by a major caliceal group independent of both the superior and inferior groups; and B2 - KM drained by minor calyx entering directly into the renal pelvis. Some details and anatomic variations of the collecting system are related to clinical and radiological aspects, particularly perpendicular calyces, interpyelocalyx space, position of calyces in relation to renal border, classification of the renal collecting system, infundibular diameter and the angle between the lower infundibulum and renal pelvis. The knowledge of intra-renal collecting system divisions and variations as the angle between the renal pelvis and lower infundibula, position of the calices in relationship with renal edge and the diameter and position of the calyces are important for the planning of minimally invasive renal surgeries.

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 1 Mendeley reader of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 1 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 1 100%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 1 100%
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 22 February 2024.
All research outputs
#17,664,073
of 25,891,484 outputs
Outputs from International Brazilian Journal of Urology
#363
of 735 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#153,901
of 297,128 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Brazilian Journal of Urology
#2
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,891,484 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 735 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% 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 297,128 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.