↓ Skip to main content

Prospective, multi-institutional surgical and quality-of-life outcomes comparison of heavyweight, midweight, and lightweight mesh in open ventral hernia repair

Overview of attention for article published in American Journal of Surgery, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
46 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
Prospective, multi-institutional surgical and quality-of-life outcomes comparison of heavyweight, midweight, and lightweight mesh in open ventral hernia repair
Published in
American Journal of Surgery, September 2016
DOI 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2016.09.003
Pubmed ID
Authors

Steven A. Groene, Tanushree Prasad, Amy E. Lincourt, Vedra A. Augenstein, Ronald Sing, Brant Todd Heniford

Abstract

Mesh choice in open ventral hernia repair (OVHR) remains controversial. Our aim was to analyze prospective outcomes among heavyweight, midweight, and lightweight (LW) mesh. A study of the International Hernia Mesh Registry was performed for OVHR. Operative details, complications, recurrence, and quality of life (QOL) at 1, 6, 12, 24, and 36 months were evaluated. There were 549 OVHRs, 99 using heavyweight, 262 midweight, and 188 LW mesh. Heavyweight group had larger defects (P ≤ .008). Midweight patients had fewer superficial surgical site infections (P = .04) and shorter LOS (P < .0001). Recurrence rates were equal (6.1% vs 6.1% vs 8.0%; P = .71). After controlling for surgical location, component separation, and preoperative pain with multivariate analysis, LW mesh was associated with an overall worse QOL at 6 months and pain at 1 year. MW mesh had fewer superficial surgical site infections and shorter LOS. After controlling for potential confounding variables, LW mesh had a worse QOL at 6 and 12 months.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 46 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 8 17%
Researcher 5 11%
Student > Postgraduate 5 11%
Student > Master 5 11%
Student > Bachelor 3 7%
Other 12 26%
Unknown 8 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 54%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 7%
Computer Science 1 2%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 2%
Social Sciences 1 2%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 12 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 09 January 2017.
All research outputs
#4,836,164
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from American Journal of Surgery
#803
of 5,052 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#74,266
of 330,356 outputs
Outputs of similar age from American Journal of Surgery
#13
of 83 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,052 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 330,356 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 83 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.