| Title |
Long-term outcome of sacral neuromodulation for chronic refractory constipation
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Techniques in Coloproctology, April 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10151-017-1613-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yasuko Maeda, Michael A. Kamm, Carolynne J. Vaizey, Klaus E. Matzel, Claes Johansson, Harald Rosen, Cornelius G. Baeten, Søren Laurberg |
| Abstract |
Sacral neuromodulation has been reported as a treatment for severe idiopathic constipation. This study aimed to evaluate the long-term effects of sacral neuromodulation by following patients who participated in a prospective, open-label, multicentre study up to 5 years. Patients were followed up at 1, 3, 6, 12, 24, 36, 48 and 60 months. Symptoms and quality of life were assessed using bowel diary, the Cleveland Clinic constipation score and the Short Form-36 quality-of-life scale. Sixty-two patients (7 male, median age 40 years) underwent test stimulation, and 45 proceeded to permanent implantation. Twenty-seven patients exited the study (7 withdrawn consent, 7 loss of efficacy, 6 site-specific reasons, 4 withdrew other reasons, 2 lost to follow-up, 1 prior to follow-up). Eighteen patients (29%) attended 60-month follow-up. In 10 patients who submitted bowel diary, their improvement of symptoms was sustained: the number of defecations per week (4.1 ± 3.7 vs 8.1 ± 3.4, mean ± standard deviation, p < 0.001, baseline vs 60 months) and sensation of incomplete emptying (0.8 ± 0.3 vs 0.2 ± 0.1, p = 0.002). In 14 patients (23%) with Cleveland Clinic constipation score, improvement was sustained at 60 months [17.9 ± 4.4 (baseline) to 10.4 ± 4.1, p < 0.001]. Some 103 device-related adverse events were reported in 27 (61%). Benefit from sacral neuromodulation in the long-term was observed in a small minority of patients with intractable constipation. The results should be interpreted with caution given the high dropout and complication rate during the follow-up period. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 19 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 6 | 32% |
| Italy | 2 | 11% |
| Australia | 1 | 5% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 9 | 47% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 8 | 42% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 5 | 26% |
| Scientists | 3 | 16% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 3 | 16% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 36 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 14% |
| Researcher | 5 | 14% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 11% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 6 | 17% |
| Unknown | 8 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 33% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 8% |
| Psychology | 2 | 6% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 7 | 19% |
| Unknown | 10 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 15 July 2017.
All research outputs
#3,187,316
of 23,301,510 outputs
Outputs from Techniques in Coloproctology
#355
of 1,283 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#59,625
of 311,012 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Techniques in Coloproctology
#18
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,301,510 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,283 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 311,012 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 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.