↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Radiological findings and the clinical importance of megacalycosis

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

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
12 Mendeley
Title
Radiological findings and the clinical importance of megacalycosis
Published in
Research and Reports in Urology, October 2015
DOI 10.2147/rru.s81519
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christos Kalaitzis, Emmanuel Patris, Evangelia Deligeorgiou, Petros Sountoulides, Athanasios Bantis, Stilianos Giannakopoulos, Stavros Touloupidis

Abstract

To describe the radiological findings and the clinical importance of megacalycosis. On the basis of a case report and literature review, diagnostic criteria and clinical significance of megacalycosis are presented. Megacalycosis is mostly asymptomatic and is usually discovered either accidentally or as a result of its complications, such as stone formation, flank pain, hematuria, infection, and fever. The renal pelvis, infundibulum, and ureter are not dilated. Calyces have a semilunar configuration rather than the conventional triangular or conical form. The tip of each pyramid is flat, and the calyces possess neither fornix nor papillae impressions. The number of calyces is increased compared to the healthy condition, typically from 20-25. The renal parenchyma has a normal width but with a slight narrowing of the renal medulla. The kidney exhibits normal function, in particular with respect to its ability to concentrate the urine. Megacalycosis is a rare, usually unilateral dilatation of the kidney calyces in the presence of a normal, undilated renal pelvis and ureter. Its pathological significance lies in the occurrence of 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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 12 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 12 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 3 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 17%
Student > Bachelor 1 8%
Researcher 1 8%
Student > Postgraduate 1 8%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 67%
Unknown 4 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 17 April 2021.
All research outputs
#6,426,255
of 22,830,751 outputs
Outputs from Research and Reports in Urology
#67
of 223 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#78,477
of 274,921 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Research and Reports in Urology
#4
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,830,751 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 223 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 274,921 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 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.