↓ Skip to main content

Endoscopic full-thickness resection of gastric and duodenal subepithelial lesions using a new, flat-based over-the-scope clip

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

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
34 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
24 Mendeley
Title
Endoscopic full-thickness resection of gastric and duodenal subepithelial lesions using a new, flat-based over-the-scope clip
Published in
Surgical Endoscopy, December 2017
DOI 10.1007/s00464-017-5989-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Wouter F. W. Kappelle, Yara Backes, Gerlof D. Valk, Leon M. G. Moons, Frank P. Vleggaar

Abstract

Surgical resection of upper gastrointestinal (GI) subepithelial tumors (SETs) is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. A new over-the-scope (OTS) clip can be used for endoscopic full-thickness resection (eFTR). We aimed to prospectively evaluate feasibility and safety of upper GI eFTR with a new, flat-based OTS clip. Consecutive patients with a gastric or duodenal SET < 20 mm were prospectively included. After identification of the lesion, the clip was placed and lesions were resected. Patients were followed for 1 month to assess severe adverse events (SAEs); 3-6 months after eFTR, endoscopy was performed. eFTR was performed on 13 lesions in 12 patients: 7 gastric and 6 duodenal SETs. Technical success was achieved in 11 cases (85%). In all 11 cases, R0-resection was achieved. In all 6 duodenal cases and in one gastric case, FTR was achieved (64%). One SAE (pain) was observed after eFTR of a gastric SET. After eFTR of duodenal SETs, several SAEs were observed: perforation (n = 1), microperforation (n = 3), and hemorrhage (n = 1). During follow-up endoscopy, the clip was no longer in situ in most patients (7 of 10; 70%). eFTR with this new flat-based OTS clip is feasible and effective. Although gastric eFTR was safe, eFTR in the duodenum was complicated by (micro)perforation in several patients. Therefore, the design of the clip or the technique of resection needs further refinement to improve safety of resection of SET in thin-walled areas such as the duodenum before being applied in clinical practice. Dutch trial register: NTR5023.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 24 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 4 17%
Researcher 4 17%
Student > Master 3 13%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 1 4%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 4%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 9 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 50%
Social Sciences 1 4%
Computer Science 1 4%
Engineering 1 4%
Design 1 4%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 8 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 28 December 2017.
All research outputs
#17,189,469
of 25,252,667 outputs
Outputs from Surgical Endoscopy
#4,112
of 6,795 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#284,060
of 455,244 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Surgical Endoscopy
#109
of 133 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,252,667 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,795 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% 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 455,244 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 133 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.