↓ Skip to main content

Routine staging with endoscopic ultrasound in patients with obstructing esophageal cancer and dysphagia rarely impacts treatment decisions

Overview of attention for article published in Surgical Endoscopy, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
26 Mendeley
Title
Routine staging with endoscopic ultrasound in patients with obstructing esophageal cancer and dysphagia rarely impacts treatment decisions
Published in
Surgical Endoscopy, November 2016
DOI 10.1007/s00464-016-5351-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sara A. Mansfield, Samer El-Dika, Somashekar G. Krishna, Kyle A. Perry, Jon P. Walker

Abstract

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has been routinely utilized for the locoregional staging of esophageal cancer. One important aspect of clinical staging has been to stratify patients to treatment with neoadjuvant chemoradiation or primary surgical therapy. We hypothesized that EUS may have a limited impact on clinical decision making in patients with dysphagia and obstructing esophageal masses. This retrospective cohort study included all patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma undergoing esophageal EUS between July 2008 and September 2013. Dysplastic Barrett's esophagus without invasive adenocarcinoma or incomplete staging was excluded. Patient demographics, endoscopic tumor characteristics, the presence of dysphagia, sonographic staging, and post-EUS therapy were recorded. Pathologic staging for patients who underwent primary surgical therapy was also recorded. Locally advanced disease was defined as at least T3 or N1, as these patients are typically treated with neoadjuvant therapy. Two hundred sixteen patients underwent EUS for esophageal adenocarcinoma, with 147 (68.1%) patients having symptoms of dysphagia on initial presentation. Patients with dysphagia were significantly more likely to have locally advanced disease on EUS than patients without dysphagia (p < 0.0001). Additionally, 145 (67.1%) patients had a partially or completely obstructing mass on initial endoscopy, of which 136 (93.8%) were locally advanced (p < 0.0001 vs. non-obstructing lesions). An overwhelming majority of patients presenting with dysphagia and/or the presence of at least partially obstructing esophageal mass at the time of esophageal cancer diagnosis had an EUS that demonstrated at least locally advanced disease. The present study supports the hypothesis that EUS may be of limited benefit for management of esophageal cancer in patients with an obstructing mass and dysphagia.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 26 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 19%
Other 4 15%
Student > Postgraduate 3 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 8%
Student > Bachelor 2 8%
Other 6 23%
Unknown 4 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 65%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 4%
Psychology 1 4%
Computer Science 1 4%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 5 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 07 July 2017.
All research outputs
#18,559,907
of 22,986,950 outputs
Outputs from Surgical Endoscopy
#4,792
of 6,095 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#303,608
of 416,496 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Surgical Endoscopy
#118
of 134 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,986,950 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,095 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% 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 416,496 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 134 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.