↓ Skip to main content

Selective Use of Peri-Operative Steroids in Pituitary Tumor Surgery: Escape from Dogma

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in endocrinology, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
34 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
Selective Use of Peri-Operative Steroids in Pituitary Tumor Surgery: Escape from Dogma
Published in
Frontiers in endocrinology, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fendo.2013.00030
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jacqueline Regan, Joseph Watson

Abstract

Objective: Traditional neurosurgical practice calls for administration of peri-operative stress-dose steroids for sellar-suprasellar masses undergoing operative treatment. This practice is considered critical to prevent peri-operative complications associated with hypoadrenalism, such as hypotension and circulatory collapse. However, stress-dose steroids complicate the management of these patients. It has been our routine practice to use stress steroids during surgery only if the patient has clinical or biochemical evidence of hypocortisolism pre-operatively. We wanted to be certain that this practice was safe. Methods: We present our retrospective analysis from a consecutive series of 114 operations in 109 patients with sellar and/or suprasellar tumors, the majority of whom were managed without empirical stress-dose steroid coverage. Only patients who were hypoadrenal pre-operatively or who had suffered apoplexy were given stress-dose coverage during surgery. We screened for biochemical evidence of hypoadrenalism as a result of surgery by measuring immediate post-operative AM serum cortisol levels. Results: There were no adverse events related to the selective use of cortisol replacement in this patient population. Conclusion: Our experience demonstrates that selective use of corticosteroid replacement is safe; it simplifies the management of the patients, and has advantages over empiric "dogmatic" steroid coverage.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users 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 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 3%
Germany 1 3%
Unknown 32 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 7 21%
Researcher 6 18%
Student > Bachelor 5 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 12%
Student > Master 3 9%
Other 4 12%
Unknown 5 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 44%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 6%
Unspecified 1 3%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 1 3%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 9 26%
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 February 2019.
All research outputs
#19,944,994
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in endocrinology
#5,754
of 13,012 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#221,304
of 289,004 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in endocrinology
#102
of 210 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,012 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% 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 289,004 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 210 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.