↓ Skip to main content

Common Channel Length in Bypass Surgery Does Not Impact T2DM in Diabetic Zucker Rats

Overview of attention for article published in Obesity Surgery, March 2017
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
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
22 Mendeley
Title
Common Channel Length in Bypass Surgery Does Not Impact T2DM in Diabetic Zucker Rats
Published in
Obesity Surgery, March 2017
DOI 10.1007/s11695-017-2611-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Claudia Laessle, Sven Michelmichel, Goran Marjanovic, Simon Kuesters, Gabriel Seifert, Ulrich T. Hopt, Jodok Matthias Fink

Abstract

Metabolic surgery is known to impact glucose tolerance but the exact mechanism is still unclear. Based on recently-published data, especially the role of the hindgut may require redefinition. Either a loop duodeno-jejunostomy (DJOS) with exclusion of one third of total intestinal length, a loop duodeno-ileostomy (DiOS, exclusion of two thirds), or SHAM operation was performed in 9-week-old Zucker diabetic fatty rats. One, 3, and 6 months after surgery, an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) and glucose-stimulated hormone analyses were conducted. Body weight was documented weekly. DJOS and DiOS animals showed significantly better glucose control in all OGTTs than the SHAM group (two-way ANOVA p < 0.0001). Body weight developed largely parallel in both intervention groups; SHAM animals had gained significantly less weight after 6 months (Mann-Whitney DJOS/DiOS vs. SHAM p < 0.05, DJOS vs. DiOS p > 0.05). Operative interventions had no impact on GLP-1 and GIP levels at any time point (Mann-Whitney p > 0.05 for all). DJOS/DiOS operations could preserve insulin production up to 6 months, while there was already a sharp decline of insulin levels in the SHAM group (Mann-Whitney: DJOS/DiOS vs. SHAM p < 0.05 for all time points). Additionally, insulin sensitivity was improved significantly 1 month postoperative in both intervention groups compared to SHAM (Mann-Whitney DJOS/DiOS vs. SHAM p < 0.05). The data of the current study demonstrate a sharp amelioration of glucose control after duodenal exclusion with unchanged levels of GLP-1 and GIP. Direct or delayed hindgut stimulation had no impact on glucose control in our model.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 22 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 5 23%
Other 3 14%
Researcher 2 9%
Student > Postgraduate 2 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 9%
Other 2 9%
Unknown 6 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 45%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 5%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 7 32%
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 19 July 2017.
All research outputs
#14,355,715
of 22,990,068 outputs
Outputs from Obesity Surgery
#1,849
of 3,402 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#173,999
of 307,884 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Obesity Surgery
#21
of 56 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,990,068 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 3,402 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 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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 307,884 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 56 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.