| Title |
Practice and complications of liver biopsy
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Digestive Diseases and Sciences, August 1993
|
| DOI | 10.1007/bf01308607 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
F. Froehlich, O. Lamy, M. Fried, J. J. Gonvers |
| Abstract |
Studies on the complication rate of liver biopsy have hitherto been conducted in referral hospital centers. They are therefore not representative for general practice where liver biopsy is performed by specialists and nonspecialists. In a postal nationwide survey, we approached all gastroenterologists and hospital internists to assess the complication rate and practice (setting, needle type, use of ultrasonography) of percutaneous liver biopsy performed in 1989 in Switzerland for diffuse liver disease. Two hundred eighty questionnaires were mailed and 252 were returned (response rate 90.0%) 165 respondents (65.5%) performed 3501 biopsies while 87 respondents (34.5%) did not practice liver biopsy; 67.7% of biopsies were executed blindly and 32.3% were guided. Eight nonfatal and three fatal complications occurred. Hemorrhage was the most frequent complication (five cases) and was responsible for all three fatal outcomes. The overall complication rate was 0.31%, being distinctly lower in the group of gastroenterologists (0.11%) as compared to the group of internists (0.55%; P = 0.031). The complication rate was 1.68% in the group of internists performing fewer than 12 biopsies per year, while there was no complication in the group of internists performing more than 50 biopsies per year (P = 0.036). Complications were not related to the needle diameter or to the absence of ultrasonography before biopsy. In conclusion, this representative survey in Switzerland shows that the complication rate of liver biopsy is mainly related to the experience and training of the operator. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 19 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 4 | 21% |
| Other | 3 | 16% |
| Professor | 3 | 16% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 2 | 11% |
| Unknown | 4 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 47% |
| Arts and Humanities | 2 | 11% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 5% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 5% |
| Neuroscience | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 5 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 22 January 2012.
All research outputs
#7,917,073
of 23,854,458 outputs
Outputs from Digestive Diseases and Sciences
#1,379
of 4,304 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,083
of 20,471 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Digestive Diseases and Sciences
#7
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,854,458 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,304 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 20,471 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.