↓ Skip to main content

Factors affecting the effectiveness and safety of submucosal tunneling endoscopic resection for esophageal submucosal tumors originating from the muscularis propria layer

Overview of attention for article published in Surgical Endoscopy, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
13 Mendeley
Title
Factors affecting the effectiveness and safety of submucosal tunneling endoscopic resection for esophageal submucosal tumors originating from the muscularis propria layer
Published in
Surgical Endoscopy, August 2017
DOI 10.1007/s00464-017-5800-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Chen Du, Lianjun Ma, Ningli Chai, Ying Gao, Xiaotong Niu, Yaqi Zhai, Zhenjuan Li, Jiangyun Meng, Ping Tang, Enqiang Linghu

Abstract

Submucosal tunneling endoscopic resection (STER) has been proved to be effective and safe for esophageal submucosal tumors (SMTs) originating from the muscularis propria (MP) layer. This study was aimed to further evaluate the effectiveness, safety, and influencing factors especially the types of mucosal incision of STER in a larger population. A total of 89 patients undergoing STER with esophageal SMTs were retrospectively enrolled in this study from May 2012 to November 2016. Clinicopathological, endoscopic, and adverse events (AEs) data were collected and analyzed. Different incision methods were compared to evaluate the optimum incision method. There were 27 females and 62 males with mean age of 46.5 ± 10.3 years. The medium size of the tumors was 16.0 mm (ranging 10.0-60.0 mm). Inverted T incisions were made in 29 (32.6%) patients, transverse incisions in 12 (13.5%) while longitudinal incisions in 48 (53.9%). En bloc resection was achieved in 70 (78.7%) patients. The residual rate was 1.1% (1/89), and no recurrence was noted even after piecemeal resection. The rate of AEs was 21.3% (19/89), and all of the AEs were cured without intervention or treated conservatively without the need for surgery. The en bloc resection rate was comparable among the three incision groups (P = 0.868); however, the incidence of AEs in the inverted T incision was lower than that in the longitudinal incision (P = 0.003). Fewer clips were used in the inverted T incision group than in the transverse incision group (P = 0.003). Although STER failed to achieve en bloc resection in 21.3% patients, it was still an effective therapy owing to low residual rate and no recurrence rate after piecemeal resection. STER was safe with no severe AEs; however, minor AEs were common. Inverted T incision seems to be the optimum entry point.

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 13 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 13 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 2 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 15%
Student > Postgraduate 2 15%
Researcher 2 15%
Professor 1 8%
Other 1 8%
Unknown 3 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 46%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 15%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 8%
Unknown 4 31%
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 27 August 2017.
All research outputs
#14,952,935
of 22,999,744 outputs
Outputs from Surgical Endoscopy
#3,605
of 6,096 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#187,559
of 316,647 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Surgical Endoscopy
#95
of 143 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,999,744 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 6,096 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 316,647 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 143 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.