↓ Skip to main content

Penile reconstruction using mesenchymal stem cells

Overview of attention for article published in Acta Cirurgica Brasileira, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
11 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
Penile reconstruction using mesenchymal stem cells
Published in
Acta Cirurgica Brasileira, August 2015
DOI 10.1590/s0102-865020150080000003
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marcus Laks, Luiz Gonzaga Freitas-Filho, Kleber Sayeg, Mila Torii Correia Leite, Luciana Cristina Teixeira

Abstract

To compare the reconstruction of corpus cavernosum segments when seeded with mesenchymal stem cells and when stem cells are infused intravenously. Sixteen New Zealand rabbits were submitted to reconstruction of the corpus cavernosum and distributed in Group A - decellularized matrices, Group B - decellularized matrices seeded with mesenchymal stem cells Group C - decellularized matrices submitted to intravenous infusion of mesenchymal stem cells. The mesenchymal stem cells were obtained by bone marrow aspiration. The venous filling aspect of the distal end of the corpus cavernosum was evaluated and the specimens were submitted to histological analisis and to immunohistochemistry. Cavernosometry was done in one animal of each group Three animals on B and three animals on C presented full filling of distal end of the corpus cavernosum. No animals in A presented filling of the distal end of corpus cavernosum. At cavernosometry the animal on B attained 50 cmH2O, on C 110 cmH2O and on A 20 cmH2O. Trabeculae forming cavernous sinuses were found in groups B and C. The reconstruction of corpus cavernosum using descellularized matrices and mesenchymal stem cells, either by intravenous injection or directly seeded is possible, with growth of corpus cavernosum-like tissue.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 11 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 11 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 3 27%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 18%
Student > Postgraduate 1 9%
Other 1 9%
Unknown 4 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 3 27%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 9%
Materials Science 1 9%
Engineering 1 9%
Unknown 5 45%

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 18 April 2017.
All research outputs
#17,157,735
of 21,241,420 outputs
Outputs from Acta Cirurgica Brasileira
#135
of 192 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#213,051
of 284,833 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Acta Cirurgica Brasileira
#1
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,241,420 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 192 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.3. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% 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 284,833 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them