↓ Skip to main content

Treatment Implications of High-Resolution Manometry Findings: Options for Patients With Esophageal Dysmotility

Overview of attention for article published in Current Treatment Options in Gastroenterology, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
4 Mendeley
Title
Treatment Implications of High-Resolution Manometry Findings: Options for Patients With Esophageal Dysmotility
Published in
Current Treatment Options in Gastroenterology, January 2014
DOI 10.1007/s11938-013-0003-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ahmed Bolkhir, C. Prakash Gyawali

Abstract

High-resolution manometry (HRM) has significantly impacted diagnosis and management of achalasia in particular, and has improved characterization of other motor disorders. Achalasia, the most profound esophageal motor disorder, is characterized by esophageal outflow obstruction from abnormal relaxation of the lower esophageal sphincter (LES) during swallowing, and presents with transit symptoms (dysphagia, regurgitation). Esophageal body motor disorders include both inhibitory nerve dysfunction associated with hypermotility or spasm, and hypomotility disorders with poor contraction. The implications of hypermotility disorders are both perceptive and obstructive. On the other hand, hypomotility disorders have reflux implications because of abnormal barrier function at the LES, and abnormal bolus clearance. Esophageal outflow obstruction in achalasia responds favorably to disruption of the LES, and outcome may be predicted by HRM subtyping of achalasia. Identification of dominant (perceptive vs. obstructive) mechanisms of symptom generation help direct therapy of hypermotility disorders, while hypomotility disorders typically require management of concurrent reflux disease.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users 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 4 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 4 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 2 50%
Other 1 25%
Student > Master 1 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 2 50%
Social Sciences 1 25%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 25%
Attention Score in Context

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 13 March 2014.
All research outputs
#14,191,572
of 22,747,498 outputs
Outputs from Current Treatment Options in Gastroenterology
#151
of 266 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#171,569
of 304,427 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Treatment Options in Gastroenterology
#3
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,747,498 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 266 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% 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 304,427 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.