↓ Skip to main content

Impact of minimally invasive surgery on short-term outcomes after rectal resection for neoplasm within the setting of an enhanced recovery program

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 (68th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
31 Mendeley
Title
Impact of minimally invasive surgery on short-term outcomes after rectal resection for neoplasm within the setting of an enhanced recovery program
Published in
Surgical Endoscopy, November 2017
DOI 10.1007/s00464-017-5956-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Allison N. Martin, Puja Shah Berry, Charles M. Friel, Traci L. Hedrick

Abstract

Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for rectal cancer has increased in recent years. Enhanced recovery (ER) protocols are associated with improved outcomes, such as decreased length of stay (LOS). We examined the impact of MIS and ER protocols on outcomes after rectal resection for neoplasm. A retrospective analysis was performed for patients undergoing elective open (OS) or MIS rectal resection for neoplasm from 2010 to 2015 at a single institution. MIS was defined as any laparoscopic or robotic procedure. An ER protocol was implemented in 8/2013. Regression models were used to estimate outcomes including LOS, 30-day morbidity, readmission, and hospital costs. Among 325 patients, 252 (77.5%) underwent OS; 73 (22.5%) underwent MIS rectal resection. Prior to ER implementation, only 6.1% underwent MIS, compared to 23.1 and 54.4% in the 2 years following ER implementation (p < 0.001). Prior to ER implementation, median LOS was 7 days (n = 181) with 23.8% 30-day morbidity. Following ER implementation, median LOS was 4 days (n = 144); patients receiving OS had median LOS of 5.5 days (n = 82) and 30-day morbidity of 19.5%. ER patients receiving MIS had median LOS of 3 days (n = 62) and 30-day morbidity of 14.5%. Univariate regression demonstrated that MIS patients on ER protocol were more likely to have a shortened LOS (< 6 days) compared to OS patients on non-ER protocol (both p < 0.001). The combination of MIS and ER protocol is significantly associated with reduced LOS for patients undergoing rectal resection for neoplasm. Further research is needed to determine which patients are best suited to MIS from an oncologic standpoint.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 31 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 16%
Student > Bachelor 5 16%
Other 3 10%
Unspecified 2 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 6%
Other 7 23%
Unknown 7 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 42%
Unspecified 2 6%
Social Sciences 2 6%
Psychology 1 3%
Environmental Science 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 10 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 19 November 2017.
All research outputs
#6,302,641
of 23,007,053 outputs
Outputs from Surgical Endoscopy
#1,225
of 6,101 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#104,125
of 329,019 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Surgical Endoscopy
#45
of 116 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,007,053 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,101 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% 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 329,019 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 68% 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 61% of its contemporaries.