↓ Skip to main content

Organ-preserving treatment of an epididymal abscess in a patient with spinal cord injury

Overview of attention for article published in Spinal Cord, June 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#14 of 1,411)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
21 tweeters
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Readers on

mendeley
14 Mendeley
Title
Organ-preserving treatment of an epididymal abscess in a patient with spinal cord injury
Published in
Spinal Cord, June 2014
DOI 10.1038/sc.2014.50
Pubmed ID
Authors

J Pannek, S Pannek-Rademacher, M Cachin-Jus

Abstract

Study design:Case report.Objectives:To describe a case of successful organ-preserving treatment of an epididymal abscess in a tetraplegic patient.Setting:Spinal Cord Injury Rehabilitation Centre in Switzerland.Methods:We present the clinical course of a patient with an epididymal abscess caused by multiresistant bacteria. As the patient declined surgical intervention, a conservative approach was induced with intravenous antibiotic treatment. As the clinical findings did not ameliorate, adjunctive homeopathic treatment was used.Results:Under combined treatment, laboratory parameters returned to normal, and the epididymal abscess was rapidly shrinking. After 1 week, merely a subcutaneous liquid structure was detected. Fine-needle aspiration revealed sterile purulent liquid, which was confirmed by microbiological testing when the subcutaneous abscess was drained. Postoperative course was uneventful.Conclusions:As the risk for recurrent epididymitis is high in persons with spinal cord injury, an organ-preserving approach is justified even in severe cases. Homeopathic treatment was a valuable adjunctive treatment in the above-mentioned case. Therefore, prospective studies are needed to further elucidate the future opportunities and limitations of classical homeopathy in the treatment of urinary tract infections.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 21 tweeters 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 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 14 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 2 14%
Other 2 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 14%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 14%
Other 3 21%
Unknown 1 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 57%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 14%
Chemistry 1 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 7%
Unknown 2 14%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 23. 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 20 September 2015.
All research outputs
#582,039
of 12,346,467 outputs
Outputs from Spinal Cord
#14
of 1,411 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,542
of 197,848 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Spinal Cord
#1
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,346,467 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,411 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 197,848 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.