Update on cystic hydatid disease
Current Opinion in Infectious Diseases, ISSN: 0951-7375, Vol: 22, Issue: 5, Page: 497-502
2009
- 131Citations
- 95Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations131
- Citation Indexes131
- 131
- CrossRef86
- Captures95
- Readers95
- 95
Review Description
Purpose of review: Cystic echinococcosis, or cystic hydatidosis, is a complex, chronic disease with a cosmopolitan distribution. In humans, its clinical spectrum ranges from asymptomatic infection to severe, rarely even fatal disease. Four approaches in clinical management exist: surgery, percutaneous techniques and drug treatment for active cysts, and the so-called watch and wait approach for inactive cysts. Allocation of patients to these treatments should be based on cyst stage, size and location, available clinical expertise and comorbidities. However, clinical decision algorithms, efficacy, relapse rates, and costs have never been properly evaluated.We review the currently available evidence for clinical decision-making and discuss ways to improve standards of care of one of the most neglected infectious diseases. Recent findings: Data are mostly derived from case series and small clinical trials, and treatment guidelines remain at the level of expert opinion. No single high-quality comparative clinical trial of the four treatment options is available to resolve important questions such as stage-specific allocation of treatments, adverse events and long-term relapse rates. Recent work is beginning to acknowledge this problem. Summary: Currently, four treatment modalities are available for cystic echinococcosis. The level of evidence on which clinicians have to rely is low. For the time being patients should thus be treated in referral centres. Proper comparative clinical trials are urgently needed. © 2009 Wolters Kluwer Health.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=70249111882&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/qco.0b013e328330331c; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19633552; http://journals.lww.com/00001432-200910000-00013; http://content.wkhealth.com/linkback/openurl?sid=WKPTLP:landingpage&an=00001432-200910000-00013; https://dx.doi.org/10.1097/qco.0b013e328330331c; https://insights.ovid.com/crossref?an=00001432-200910000-00013
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know