↓ Skip to main content

Endometriosis and Vesico-Sphincteral Disorders

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Surgery, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
26 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
Endometriosis and Vesico-Sphincteral Disorders
Published in
Frontiers in Surgery, June 2015
DOI 10.3389/fsurg.2015.00023
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anis Fadhlaoui, Tessa Gillon, Issam Lebbi, Jean Bouquet de Jolinière, Anis Feki

Abstract

The aim of this mini review is to determine the relationship between endometriosis and urinary tract symptoms and to investigate the consequences of surgical treatment of mild to severe endometriosis, especially deep lesions, on the vesico-sphincteral function (lower urinary tract function). We performed a literature review by searching the MEDLINE database for articles published between 2000 and 2014, limiting the searches to the words: urinary tract, vesico-sphincteral, dysfunction, endometriosis, symptoms, and surgery. The incidence of vesico-sphincteral symptoms in endometriosis varies from 3.4 up to 15.4%. The frequency of such symptoms seems to be under estimated because of a lack of specific questionnaire including urinary symptoms. Urodynamic evaluation could help to detect unsuspected abnormalities. It seems that endometriosis surgery (particularly deep infiltrating lesions) is a purveyor of de novo urinary dysfunction, with an incidence varying from 6.8 up to 17.5%. Nerve sparing processes such as neuro-navigators or neuro-stimulators seem to be promising techniques to avoid postoperative urinary tract dysfunction. A precise anamnesis and the use of specific validated questionnaires (IPSS and BFLUTS) improve the screening of vesico-sphincteral symptoms in case of endometriosis. No recommendation can be found in the literature about the place of urodynamic evaluation. Most publications lack of proof and therefore do not allow making recommendations about optimal treatment of endometriotic lesions to avoid urinary tract disorders.

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 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 26 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 4 15%
Other 3 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 12%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 8%
Other 4 15%
Unknown 7 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 62%
Unknown 10 38%
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 17 April 2018.
All research outputs
#17,758,791
of 22,807,037 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Surgery
#760
of 2,854 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#177,086
of 263,857 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Surgery
#8
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,807,037 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,854 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 263,857 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.