Renata Lilian Bormann, Eduardo Lima da Rocha, Marcelo Longo Kierzenbaum, Bruno Cheregati Pedrassa, Lucas Rios Torres, Giuseppe D'Ippolito
Abstract
Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has several advantages in the evaluation of cancer patients with thoracic lesions, including involvement of the chest wall, pleura, lungs, mediastinum, esophagus and heart. It is a quite useful tool in the diagnosis, staging, surgical planning, treatment response evaluation and follow-up of these patients. In the present review, the authors contextualize the relevance of MRI in the evaluation of thoracic lesions in cancer patients. Considering that MRI is a widely available method with high contrast and spatial resolution and without the risks associated with the use of ionizing radiation, its use combined with new techniques such as cine-MRI and functional methods such as perfusion- and diffusion-weighted imaging may be useful as an alternative tool with performance comparable or complementary to conventional radiological methods such as radiography, computed tomography and PET/CT imaging in the evaluation of patients with thoracic neoplasias.
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 24 March 2015.
All research outputs
#17,751,741
of 22,796,179 outputs
Outputs from Radiologia Brasileira
#223
of 379 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#242,451
of 352,570 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Radiologia Brasileira
#7
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,796,179 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 379 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.0. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% 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 352,570 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.
