↓ Skip to main content

Onset of Microscopic Polyangiitis in Binephrectomied Patient on Chronic Hemodialysis—Case Report

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in immunology, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
6 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
Onset of Microscopic Polyangiitis in Binephrectomied Patient on Chronic Hemodialysis—Case Report
Published in
Frontiers in immunology, February 2017
DOI 10.3389/fimmu.2017.00111
Pubmed ID
Authors

Aleksandar Jankovic, Vesna Maslarevic-Radovic, Petar Djuric, Jelena Tosic-Dragovic, Ana Bulatovic, Nikola Simovic, Milos Mitrovic, Verica Stankovic-Popovic, Vesna Dopudja-Pantic, Snezana Arandjelovic, Nada Dimkovic

Abstract

Microscopic polyangiitis (MPA) is one of the causes of the pulmonary-renal syndrome associated with elevated non-specific markers of inflammation and antineutrophil cytoplasmic autoantibody (ANCA) positivity in 50-75%. De novo occurrence of the disease in patients on chronic hemodialysis (HD) has not been described. We presented patient who developed MPO-ANCA-associated MPA with lung and musculoskeletal involvement after 4 years on regular HD due to bilateral nephrectomy. After excluding the other causes of MPO-ANCA positivity, diagnosis was confirmed even without renal biopsy. Patient received standard immunosuppression therapy and he is still in remission after 27 months. The onset of immune-mediated disease could be observed even after introduction of renal replacement therapy, which may be a diagnostic problem. Early recognition and traditional immunosuppressive regiment may provide successful outcome.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

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.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 6 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 6 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 1 17%
Librarian 1 17%
Other 1 17%
Student > Postgraduate 1 17%
Unknown 2 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 3 50%
Unknown 3 50%
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 18 February 2017.
All research outputs
#22,834,739
of 25,461,852 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in immunology
#27,577
of 31,698 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#372,189
of 432,438 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in immunology
#358
of 397 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,461,852 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,698 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 432,438 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 397 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.