↓ Skip to main content

Colorectal anastomotic leak: delay in reintervention after false-negative computed tomography scan is a reason for concern

Overview of attention for article published in Techniques in Coloproctology, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#43 of 1,361)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
67 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
56 Mendeley
Title
Colorectal anastomotic leak: delay in reintervention after false-negative computed tomography scan is a reason for concern
Published in
Techniques in Coloproctology, September 2017
DOI 10.1007/s10151-017-1689-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

C. C. M. Marres, A. W. H. van de Ven, L. G. J. Leijssen, P. C. M. Verbeek, W. A. Bemelman, C. J. Buskens

Abstract

Early detection of anastomotic leakage (AL) after colorectal surgery followed by timely reintervention is of crucial importance. The aim of this study was to investigate the accuracy of computed tomography (CT) imaging for AL and the effects of delay in reintervention after a false-negative CT. All files from patients who had colorectal surgery with primary anastomoses between 2009 and 2014 were reviewed. The predictive value of CT scanning for AL was determined and correlated with short-term postoperative patient outcomes. In addition, factors predictive of false-negative scans were assessed. Six hundred and twenty-eight patient files were reviewed. In total, a CT scan was performed in 127 patients. Overall, leakage was seen in 49 patients (7.8%). The positive and negative predictive values were 78 and 88%, respectively. Sensitivity was 73% and specificity 91%. In patients with a true-positive CT (n = 24), reintervention followed after a median interval of 0 days (IQR 1), whereas this was 1 day (IQR 2) in the false-negative group (n = 11) (p < 0.05). This was associated with a significantly increased mortality rate (1/24 = 4.2% vs 5/11 = 45.5%) (p < 0.005), an increased length of hospital stay [median 28 days (IQR 26) vs 54 days (IQR 20) (p < 0.05)]. Delayed reintervention after false-negative CT scanning is associated with a high mortality rate and a significant increase in length of hospital stay.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 67 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 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 56 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 16%
Student > Bachelor 7 13%
Other 7 13%
Researcher 7 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 9%
Other 9 16%
Unknown 12 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 29 52%
Engineering 2 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 2%
Other 3 5%
Unknown 18 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 38. 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 16 February 2020.
All research outputs
#1,089,495
of 25,603,577 outputs
Outputs from Techniques in Coloproctology
#43
of 1,361 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,848
of 325,870 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Techniques in Coloproctology
#5
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,603,577 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,361 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its peers.
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 325,870 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.