↓ Skip to main content

Kartagener’s syndrome: review of a case series

Overview of attention for article published in Multidisciplinary Respiratory Medicine, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
41 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
Kartagener’s syndrome: review of a case series
Published in
Multidisciplinary Respiratory Medicine, May 2015
DOI 10.1186/s40248-015-0015-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nicola Ciancio, Maria Margherita de Santi, Raffaele Campisi, Laura Amato, Giuseppina Di Martino, Giuseppe Di Maria

Abstract

Kartagener Syndrome (KS) is a rare autosomal recessive genetic disorder, resulting in a group of clinical manifestations, including bronchiectasis, chronic pansinusitis and situs inversus. We hereby reviewed eight cases of this rare entity selected from patients attending our outpatients Respiratory Unit since 2006. Samples of respiratory epithelium were obtained with the method of nasal brushing and sent to a specialized center in order to be studied with electron microscopy. At least 50 cross sections of different cilia from different cells were observed in each specimen to study the axonemal structure. Electron micrographs were taken at a magnification of X 50,000 to determine the orientation of the cilia and at a magnification of X 110,000 to study the axonemal pattern. The incidence of abnormal cilia was expressed as a percentage. We observed different ultrastructural defects in our KS patients, including absence of outer dynein arms, absence of outer and inner dynein arms, and absence of the central pair with transposition of a peripheral doublet into the central position. Patient's follow up lasted till 2014, however two patients with more severe clinical behavior died before. This is a review of a case series, yet our data has shown that nasal brushing with ultrastructural pathological differentiation may be useful to identify patients with high risk and to develop more complex clinical presentations.

X Demographics

X Demographics

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

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 41 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 15%
Student > Bachelor 6 15%
Student > Master 5 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 12%
Student > Postgraduate 3 7%
Other 9 22%
Unknown 7 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 46%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 5%
Unspecified 1 2%
Other 4 10%
Unknown 8 20%
Attention Score in Context

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 2015.
All research outputs
#20,674,485
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from Multidisciplinary Respiratory Medicine
#227
of 307 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#206,203
of 280,772 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Multidisciplinary Respiratory Medicine
#4
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 307 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.3. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% 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 280,772 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.