↓ Skip to main content

Cross-sectional imaging of iatrogenic complications after extracorporeal and endourological treatment of urolithiasis

Overview of attention for article published in Insights into Imaging, September 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (51st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
37 Mendeley
Title
Cross-sectional imaging of iatrogenic complications after extracorporeal and endourological treatment of urolithiasis
Published in
Insights into Imaging, September 2014
DOI 10.1007/s13244-014-0355-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Massimo Tonolini, Federica Villa, Sonia Ippolito, Alessandra Pagani, Roberto Bianco

Abstract

Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL), percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) and ureteroscopy (URS) currently represent the mainstay treatment options for the vast majority of patients with urolithiasis, with limited contraindications and high success rates. However, minimally invasive extracorporeal and endourological treatments are associated with a non-negligible morbidity including occasional life-threatening occurrences. These complications represent a source of concern for urologists since they may result in prolonged hospitalisation, need for surgical, endoscopic or interventional treatment, long-term renal impairment, and sometimes even medical malpractice claims. Due to the increasing prevalence of urolithiasis and the large number of therapeutic procedures performed, in hospitals with active urologic practices radiologists are increasingly requested to investigate suspected post-procedural complications following ESWL, PCNL or ureteroscopic stone removal. Based upon our experience, this pictorial essay provides an overview of current extracorporeal and endourological treatment modalities for urolithiasis, including indications and possible complications according to the most recent guidelines from the European Association of Urology (EAU). Afterwards, we review the clinical features and cross-sectional imaging appearances of common and unusual complications with case examples, including steinstrasse, subcapsular, perirenal and suburothelial haemorrhages, severe urinary tract infections (such as pyeloureteritis, pyelonephritis, renal abscesses and pyonephrosis), ureteral injuries and delayed strictures. Teaching points • Extracorporeal lithotripsy, percutaneous nephrolitotomy and ureteroscopy allow treating urolithiasis. • Minimally invasive extracorporeal and endourological treatment have non-negligible morbidity. • Multidetector CT allows confident assessment of stone-free status and postprocedural complications. • Main complications include steinstrasse, bleeding, severe infections, ureteral injuries and strictures. • Imaging triage allows the choice among conservative, surgical, endoscopic or interventive treatment.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 3%
Unknown 36 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 7 19%
Student > Master 5 14%
Other 4 11%
Student > Bachelor 3 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 8%
Other 7 19%
Unknown 8 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 49%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 5%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 11 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 19 December 2014.
All research outputs
#14,350,984
of 24,217,893 outputs
Outputs from Insights into Imaging
#575
of 1,072 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#124,352
of 256,824 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Insights into Imaging
#10
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,217,893 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,072 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% 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 256,824 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.