↓ Skip to main content

Metabolic Consequences after Urinary Diversion

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Pediatrics, March 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
33 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
Metabolic Consequences after Urinary Diversion
Published in
Frontiers in Pediatrics, March 2014
DOI 10.3389/fped.2014.00015
Pubmed ID
Authors

Raimund Stein, Peter Rubenwolf

Abstract

Metabolic disturbances are well-known, but sometimes neglected immediate consequences or late sequelae following urinary diversion (UD) using bowel segments. Whereas subclinical disturbances appear to be quite common, clinically relevant metabolic complications, however, are rare. Exclusion of bowel segments for UD results in loss of absorptive surface for its physiological function. Previous studies demonstrated that at least some of the absorptive and secreting properties of the bowel are preserved when exposed to urine. For each bowel segment typical consequences and complications have been reported. The use of ileal and/or colonic segments may result in hyperchloremic metabolic acidosis, which can be prevented if prophylactic treatment with alkali supplementation is started early. The resection of ileal segments may be responsible for malabsorption of vitamin B12 and bile acids with subsequent neurological and hematological late sequelae as well as potential worsening of the patient's bowel habits. Hence, careful patient and procedure selection, meticulous long-term follow-up, and prophylactic treatment of subclinical acidosis is of paramount importance in the prevention of true metabolic complications.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 33 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 5 15%
Student > Master 5 15%
Student > Bachelor 4 12%
Researcher 4 12%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 12%
Other 8 24%
Unknown 3 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 64%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 6%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 1 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 5 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 September 2019.
All research outputs
#14,776,077
of 22,747,498 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Pediatrics
#2,246
of 5,906 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#125,483
of 220,762 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Pediatrics
#7
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,747,498 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,906 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% 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 220,762 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 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.