| Title |
Use of biliary stent in laparoscopic common bile duct exploration
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Surgical Endoscopy, September 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00464-014-3797-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Matthew Lyon, Seema Menon, Abhiney Jain, Harish Kumar |
| Abstract |
It is well supported in the literature that laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) for choledocholithiasis has equal efficacy when compared to ERCP followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Decompression after supra-duodenal choledochotomy is common practice as it reduced the risk of bile leaks. We conducted a prospective non-randomized study to compare outcomes and length of stay in patients undergoing biliary stent insertion versus T-tube drainage following LCBDE via choledochotomy. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Colombia | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 27 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 5 | 19% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 11% |
| Librarian | 3 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 11% |
| Other | 6 | 22% |
| Unknown | 3 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 18 | 67% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 7% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 7% |
| Unknown | 5 | 19% |
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 10 April 2015.
All research outputs
#14,786,093
of 22,764,165 outputs
Outputs from Surgical Endoscopy
#3,565
of 6,022 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#138,887
of 252,171 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Surgical Endoscopy
#64
of 151 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,764,165 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 6,022 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 252,171 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 151 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.