↓ Skip to main content

Minimally invasive surgical approaches offer earlier time to adjuvant chemotherapy but not improved survival in resected pancreatic cancer

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

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
11 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
34 Mendeley
Title
Minimally invasive surgical approaches offer earlier time to adjuvant chemotherapy but not improved survival in resected pancreatic cancer
Published in
Surgical Endoscopy, November 2017
DOI 10.1007/s00464-017-5937-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Katelin A. Mirkin, Erin K. Greenleaf, Christopher S. Hollenbeak, Joyce Wong

Abstract

Pancreatic surgery encompasses complex operations with significant potential morbidity. Greater experience in minimally invasive surgery (MIS) has allowed resections to be performed laparoscopically and robotically. This study evaluates the impact of surgical approach in resected pancreatic cancer. The National Cancer Data Base (2010-2012) was reviewed for patients with stages 1-3 resected pancreatic carcinoma. Open approaches were compared to MIS. A sub-analysis was then performed comparing robotic and laparoscopic approaches. Of the 9047 patients evaluated, surgical approach was open in 7511 (83%), laparoscopic in 992 (11%), and robotic in 131 (1%). The laparoscopic and robotic conversion rate to open was 28% (n = 387) and 17% (n = 26), respectively. Compared to open, MIS was associated with more distal resections (13.5, 24.3%, respectively, p < 0.0001), shorter hospital length of stay (LOS) (11.3, 9.5 days, respectively, p < 0.0001), more margin-negative resections (75, 79%, p = 0.038), and quicker time to initiation of chemotherapy (TTC) (59.1, 56.3 days, respectively, p = 0.0316). There was no difference in number of lymph nodes obtained based on surgical approach (p = 0.5385). When stratified by type of resection (head, distal, or total), MIS offered significantly shorter LOS in all types. Multivariate analysis demonstrated no survival benefit for any MIS approach relative to open (all, p > 0.05). When adjusted for patient, disease, and treatment characteristics, TTC was not an independent prognostic factor (HR 1.09, p = 0.084). MIS appears to offer comparable surgical oncologic benefit with improved LOS and shorter TTC. This effect, however, was not associated with improved survival.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 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 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 34 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 24%
Other 5 15%
Student > Bachelor 3 9%
Student > Master 3 9%
Professor 1 3%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 11 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 44%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 6%
Social Sciences 2 6%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 12 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 14 November 2017.
All research outputs
#6,443,331
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Surgical Endoscopy
#1,093
of 6,839 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#97,248
of 340,693 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Surgical Endoscopy
#40
of 116 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,839 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 340,693 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 116 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.