↓ Skip to main content

Neuroendocrine tumor in gastric adenoma: a diagnostic pitfall mimicking invasive adenocarcinoma

Overview of attention for article published in Diagnostic Pathology, August 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
14 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
Neuroendocrine tumor in gastric adenoma: a diagnostic pitfall mimicking invasive adenocarcinoma
Published in
Diagnostic Pathology, August 2012
DOI 10.1186/1746-1596-7-102
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sun-Mi Lee, Soomin Ahn, Yun Kyung Lee, Kee-Taek Jang, Cheol Keun Park, Kyoung-Mee Kim

Abstract

Neuroendocrine tumor (NET) in adenoma of the gastrointestinal tract is a rare mixed glandular-endocrine neoplasm and has uncommonly been described mostly in the colon. Histologically, this tumor is composed of a predominant proportion of benign adenomatous component and a small portion of well-differentiated NE component. Only three cases of NET in gastric adenoma have been reported in the literature. We present 4 cases of NET in gastric adenoma mimicking invasive adenocarcinoma. The NETs were 0.62 mm to 4.1 mm in size and located at the basal lamina propria, muscularis mucosa and submucosa. Histologically, NETs consisted of nests, cords, tubules, and clusters of cells that predominantly interposed between the foveolar base without disturbing the overall polyp architecture. The lesions were completely removed by endoscopic submucosal dissection in three cases and in one case, subtotal gastrectomy was performed because endoscopic biopsy was invasive adenocarcinoma. The patients' clinical course was uneventful without an evidence of recurrence or metastasis. The recognition of NET in gastric adenoma will help avoid potential diagnostic pitfalls masquerading as invasvie adenocarcinomas posed by their infiltrative pattern into submucosa. Virtual slides: The virtual slide(s) for this article can be found here: http://www.diagnosticpathology.diagnomx.eu/vs/1688552293761001.

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 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 %
Researcher 3 21%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 14%
Student > Postgraduate 2 14%
Student > Master 1 7%
Librarian 1 7%
Other 2 14%
Unknown 3 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 57%
Neuroscience 1 7%
Computer Science 1 7%
Unknown 4 29%
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 15 August 2012.
All research outputs
#18,312,024
of 22,673,450 outputs
Outputs from Diagnostic Pathology
#755
of 1,118 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#128,594
of 167,579 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Diagnostic Pathology
#15
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,673,450 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 1,118 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.7. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% 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 167,579 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.