| Title |
Deep Pelvic Surgical Site Infection After Radiotherapy and Surgery for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Annals of Surgical Oncology, October 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1245/s10434-016-5621-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
E. B. Thorgersen, M. A. Goscinski, M. Spasojevic, A. M. Solbakken, A. B. Mariathasan, K. Boye, S. G. Larsen, K. Flatmark |
| Abstract |
High morbidity, increased mortality, and impaired long-term oncologic outcome have been reported after deep surgical site infection (SSI) in rectal cancer surgery. The rate, risk factors and consequences of deep SSI after (chemo)radiotherapy [(C)RT], and surgery for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) in a tertiary university hospital single centre cohort of 540 patients are presented. Patients with LARC, operated between January 1, 2007 and December 31, 2015, were identified in the institutional prospective database. All patients had tumours threatening the mesorectal fascia or invading adjacent organs, with a high rate of T4 tumours (60 %), and all received (C)RT. Risk factors for deep SSI were calculated by multivariable logistic regression analysis. Morbidity data were assessed. Overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) between patients with or without deep SSI were estimated. Of 540 patients, 104 (19 %) experienced a deep SSI, with the highest rate in the abdominoperineal resection (APR) group with 25 %. APR, good response to (C)RT (low tumour regression grade), age, and operative blood loss were identified as significant (P < 0.05) risk factors for deep SSI in multivariable analysis. No difference was found in OS (P = 0.995) or DFS (P = 0.568). Hospital stay increased with 5 days (P < 0.001), and complete wound healing at the 3-month follow-up decreased from 86 to 45 % (P < 0.001) after deep SSI. Deep SSI is a frequent and major complication after rectal surgery for LARC, with high morbidity, increased hospital stay and protracted wound healing. Interestingly, deep SSI did not influence long-term oncologic outcome. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 17 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unspecified | 2 | 12% |
| Lecturer | 2 | 12% |
| Researcher | 2 | 12% |
| Professor | 1 | 6% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 8 | 47% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 24% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 12% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 9 | 53% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 01 March 2017.
All research outputs
#14,924,861
of 22,957,478 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Surgical Oncology
#4,295
of 6,518 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#189,974
of 316,358 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Surgical Oncology
#68
of 96 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,957,478 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,518 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% 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 316,358 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 96 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.