↓ Skip to main content

Robotic assisted laparoscopic radical cystectomy with stentless intracorporeal modified Ves.Pa neobladder: early experience

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Robotic Surgery, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (58th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Readers on

mendeley
22 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.
Article details
Title
Robotic assisted laparoscopic radical cystectomy with stentless intracorporeal modified Ves.Pa neobladder: early experience
Published in
Journal of Robotic Surgery, January 2017
DOI 10.1007/s11701-017-0673-5
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

This study aimed at demonstrating the feasibility of robotic assisted laparoscopic radical cystectomy with pure intracorporeal modified Ves.Pa neobladder with stentless ureteroileal anastomosis. Pure intracorporeal robotic assisted laparoscopic technique has been recently developed with a select number of high-volume centers utilizing various operative and neobladder techniques. We reviewed the patient characteristics, operative details and perioperative courses in the two patients who have undergone robotic assisted laparoscopic radical cystectomy with pure intracorporeal modified Ves.Pa neobladder and one who has undergone the Hautmann W neobladder. These results were compared to other contemporary robotic neobladder series. We demonstrate technical success with similar operative and perioperative results with the modified Ves.Pa neobladder. The robotic pure intracorporeal modified Ves.Pa neobladder is a technically feasible operation and may be easier to perform compared to other neobladders. Initial experience suggests operative time and perioperative outcomes are similar to other robotic techniques.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 22 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 5 23%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 9%
Student > Master 2 9%
Researcher 2 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 9%
Other 3 14%
Unknown 6 27%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 41%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 5%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 5%
Unknown 10 45%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 15 January 2017.
All research outputs
#6,777,903
of 22,931,367 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Robotic Surgery
#154
of 687 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#126,406
of 421,326 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Robotic Surgery
#7
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,931,367 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 687 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 421,326 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 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 58% of its contemporaries.