↓ Skip to main content

Efficacy of laparoscopic herniorrhaphy for treating incarcerated pediatric inguinal hernia

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

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
22 Mendeley
Title
Efficacy of laparoscopic herniorrhaphy for treating incarcerated pediatric inguinal hernia
Published in
Hernia, August 2017
DOI 10.1007/s10029-017-1655-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

S. R. Lee

Abstract

Inguinal hernia repair is one of the most common elective surgeries. Most patients present with reducible inguinal bulging; however, in cases of incarcerated inguinal hernia (IIH), an emergency surgery is required. Here, we report the surgical outcomes of a laparoscopic approach for IIH. Laparoscopic herniorrhaphy was performed in 4782 pediatric patients from September 2012 to December 2016 at Damsoyu Hospital, Seoul, Korea. Among them, the surgical outcomes of 164 IIH patients were retrospectively analyzed. Incarcerated organs comprised 51 ovaries, 103 intestines, and 10 omentums. The ovary (51/66) and intestine (88/98) were the most common incarcerated organs in females and males, respectively. The intestines, ovaries, and omentums were preserved in most cases. An oophorectomy was performed in one female patient with an unrecovered ischemic ovary, and an orchiectomy was performed in a male patient with ischemic testis because of cord vessel compression caused by intestine incarceration. In male pediatric patients, an age of <12 months and symptom duration of >1 week were risk factors for IIH, whereas in female pediatric patients, an age of <12 months and symptom duration of ≤1 week were risk factors for IIH. The intestines and ovaries were the most commonly herniated organs in male and female pediatric patients, respectively. Intracorporeal organ reduction was easily performed with a laparoscopic instrument.

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 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 > Postgraduate 3 14%
Other 2 9%
Lecturer 2 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 9%
Other 2 9%
Unknown 9 41%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 45%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 14%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 5%
Arts and Humanities 1 5%
Unknown 7 32%
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 31 August 2017.
All research outputs
#20,444,703
of 22,999,744 outputs
Outputs from Hernia
#904
of 1,118 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#275,890
of 315,948 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Hernia
#14
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,999,744 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,118 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 315,948 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 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.