↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Cutaneous tube ureterostomy: a fast and effective method of urinary diversion in emergency situations

Overview of attention for article published in Research and Reports in Urology, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
17 Mendeley
Title
Cutaneous tube ureterostomy: a fast and effective method of urinary diversion in emergency situations
Published in
Research and Reports in Urology, June 2015
DOI 10.2147/rru.s83284
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tamer Abdin, Gideon Zamir, Alon Pikarsky, Ran Katz, Ezekiel H Landau, Ofer N Gofrit

Abstract

To report on a simple and rapid method of urinary diversion. This method was applied successfully in different clinical scenarios when primary reconstruction of the ureters was not possible. The disconnected ureter is catheterized by a feeding tube. The tube is secured with sutures and brought out to the lateral abdominal wall as cutaneous tube ureterostomy (CTU). This method was applied in three different clinical scenarios: a 40-year-old man who sustained multiple high-velocity gunshots to the pelvis with combined rectal and bladder trigone injuries and massive bleeding from a comminuted pubic fracture. Damage control included colostomy and bilateral CTUs. A 26-year-old woman had transection of the right lower ureter during abdominal hysterectomy. Diagnosis was delayed for 3 weeks when the patient developed sepsis. The right kidney was diverted with a CTU. A 37-year-old male suffered from bladder perforation and hemorrhagic shock. Emergency cystectomy was done and urinary diversion was accomplished with bilateral CTUs. In all cases, effective drainage of the urinary system was achieved with normalization of kidney function. When local or systemic conditions preclude definitive repair and damage control surgery is needed, CTU provides fast and effective urinary diversion.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 6%
Unknown 16 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 3 18%
Researcher 2 12%
Lecturer 1 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 6%
Other 2 12%
Unknown 7 41%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 47%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 6%
Sports and Recreations 1 6%
Engineering 1 6%
Unknown 6 35%
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 30 June 2015.
All research outputs
#20,656,161
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Research and Reports in Urology
#189
of 260 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#206,510
of 281,411 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Research and Reports in Urology
#4
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 260 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.7. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% 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 281,411 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.