↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Magnetic resonance imaging findings and neurodevelopmental outcomes in neonates with urea-cycle defects

Overview of attention for article published in International Medical Case Reports Journal, August 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
22 Mendeley
Title
Magnetic resonance imaging findings and neurodevelopmental outcomes in neonates with urea-cycle defects
Published in
International Medical Case Reports Journal, August 2013
DOI 10.2147/imcrj.s43513
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anna Catherine Gunz, Karen Choong, Murray Potter, Elka Miller

Abstract

The urea-cycle functions to facilitate ammonia excretion, a disruption of which results in the accumulation of toxic metabolites. The neurological outcome of neonatal-onset urea-cycle defects (UCDs) is poor, and there are no good predictors of prognosis beyond ammonia levels at presentation. The role of neuroimaging in the prognosis of neonatal-onset UCDs is unclear. We describe the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings of two patients with neonatal-onset UCDs (argininosuccinic aciduria and citrullinemia) at presentation and at 2-year follow-up, and present a review of the literature on neuroimaging in this age-group. We observed two potentially significant distinct patterns of cerebral involvement on MRI: (1) a central and focal pattern of involvement limited to the basal ganglia, perirolandic regions, and internal capsule; and (2) diffuse involvement of the cerebral cortex, internal capsule, basal ganglia, and variably thalami and brain stem. Patients with more diffuse findings tended to have higher serum glutamine peaks and worse neurological outcomes, while those with central involvement, aggressive acute management, and early liver transplantation tended to have better outcomes. We propose that MRI imaging of the brain may have prognostic value following presentation with neonatal UCDs, particularly in identifying patients at risk for poor outcome. The role and timing of follow-up neuroimaging is currently unclear. Further collaborative studies are necessary to evaluate whether patterns of MRI findings vary with specific UCD subtypes, and are predictive of clinical outcomes in neonatal UCDs.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 5%
Unknown 21 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 23%
Other 3 14%
Student > Postgraduate 3 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 9%
Student > Bachelor 2 9%
Other 3 14%
Unknown 4 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 45%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 9%
Social Sciences 2 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 5%
Psychology 1 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 6 27%
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 19 November 2013.
All research outputs
#15,285,728
of 22,731,677 outputs
Outputs from International Medical Case Reports Journal
#163
of 370 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#122,565
of 198,413 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Medical Case Reports Journal
#2
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,731,677 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 370 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.4. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% 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 198,413 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 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.