↓ Skip to main content

Detection of digestive malignancies and post-gastrectomy complications via gastrointestinal fluid examination

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers of Medicine, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
21 Mendeley
Title
Detection of digestive malignancies and post-gastrectomy complications via gastrointestinal fluid examination
Published in
Frontiers of Medicine, March 2017
DOI 10.1007/s11684-016-0493-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lei Huang, Aman Xu

Abstract

To date, gastric carcinoma (GC) is one of the common and fatal digestive malignancies worldwide. The prognosis of GC is not always satisfactory because of late diagnosis. Scholars are keen on discovering novel accurate and economical biomarkers in body liquids for GC screening to detect and evaluate the lesion before the results of imaging techniques are obtained. While traditional serum assays have limited sensitivity and specificity, gastrointestinal juice may provide relevant specific biomarkers because of its close contact with the tumor. Herein, the current progress in the relationship between gastrointestinal fluid analyses and GC is systematically and comprehensively reviewed. The detection of gastric juice pH, fluorescence spectrum, cytology, Helicobacter pylori-associated markers, nitrosamines, conventional tumor markers, amino acids, proteomics, microRNAs, long noncoding RNAs, protein-coding genes, vitamin C, etc., and combination tests of different category markers could provide important diagnostic and prognostic clues for gastrointestinal diseases. Particularly, early GC may be efficiently screened using gastric juice. Gastrointestinal fluid examination could also predict the adverse effects of postgastrectomy, such as pancreatic leakage, fistula, and abscess. Gastric fluid markers should be further studied to reveal the early predicators of malignancy and complications. The methods for obtaining the samples of gastrointestinal juice with minimum incision should also be comprehensively investigated.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 21 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 14%
Researcher 2 10%
Student > Bachelor 1 5%
Professor 1 5%
Other 4 19%
Unknown 6 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 38%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 5%
Other 2 10%
Unknown 7 33%
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 15 September 2017.
All research outputs
#20,447,499
of 23,002,898 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers of Medicine
#280
of 351 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#270,739
of 310,743 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers of Medicine
#6
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,002,898 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 351 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. 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 310,743 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 10 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.