↓ Skip to main content

Curative use of forequarter amputation for recurrent breast cancer over an axillary area: a case report and literature review

Overview of attention for article published in World Journal of Surgical Oncology, November 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
12 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
Curative use of forequarter amputation for recurrent breast cancer over an axillary area: a case report and literature review
Published in
World Journal of Surgical Oncology, November 2014
DOI 10.1186/1477-7819-12-346
Pubmed ID
Authors

Chun-Hao Tsai, Huey-En Tzeng, Wei-Kae Juang, Pei-Guo Chu, Patricia Fann, Yi-Chin Fong, Horng-Chaung Hsu, Yun Yen

Abstract

Axillary recurrence of breast cancer that involves the brachial neurovascular bundle is uncommon. However, for many patients with such recurrence, forequarter amputation can play a palliative role in relieving excruciating pain and paralysis of the upper limb. Further, for those patients who do not have distant metastasis or other local-regional recurrence, forequarter amputation provides a chance for a cure. Only a few case reports of curative amputations for recurrent breast cancer are present in the literature. Here, we report a case of forequarter amputation for curative treatment of axillary recurrent breast cancer, together with a literature review. To date, we have followed the patient for three years after amputation, during which there has been no evidence of recurrence or metastasis. Although radical resection is feasible, it can be accompanied by surgical wound complications and psychosocial stress. Therefore, an organized multidisciplinary approach is needed to ensure the success of radical resection.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 12 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 12 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 2 17%
Researcher 2 17%
Student > Postgraduate 2 17%
Student > Master 1 8%
Professor 1 8%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 3 25%
Unspecified 2 17%
Psychology 2 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 8%
Unknown 4 33%

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 02 June 2017.
All research outputs
#6,963,688
of 11,234,828 outputs
Outputs from World Journal of Surgical Oncology
#352
of 1,262 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#123,599
of 243,981 outputs
Outputs of similar age from World Journal of Surgical Oncology
#46
of 102 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,234,828 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,262 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% 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 243,981 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 102 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.