| Title |
Impact of Nasojejunal Feeding on Outcome of Patients with Walled Off Pancreatic Necrosis (WOPN) Presenting with Pain: a Pilot Study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery, May 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11605-015-2843-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Surinder S Rana, Vinita Chaudhary, Ravi Sharma, Vishal Sharma, Puneet Chhabra, Deepak K Bhasin |
| Abstract |
Drainage is usually recommended in symptomatic walled off pancreatic necrosis (WOPN). WOPN presenting with pain may get symptomatic relief if the pancreas is given rest by initiating nasojejunal (NJ) feed. The aim of this was to prospectively study the efficacy of nasojejunal (NJ) feeding in patients of WOPN presenting with abdominal pain. Twenty-one patients (15 M; 35 ± 12 years) with WOPN (size 7-16 cm) presenting with pain underwent NJ tube placement under endoscopic guidance. Following this, pain relief and long-term outcome were studied. Etiology of pancreatitis was alcohol in 12, gall stones in 6, and idiopathic in 3 patients. NJ tube was successfully placed in all patients and 17/21 (81 %) patients had symptomatic relief in 1-4 days (mean 2 ± 1 days) following NJ feeding. NJ tube was removed after 7-10 days (mean 7 ± 1 days), and 14 (61 %) patients remained pain free and follow-up imaging (1-8 months) revealed complete resolution or decrease in size of WOPN. Three patients had recurrence of pain and were successfully treated with endoscopic drainage. NJ feeding improves pain in the majority of patients with WOPN and thus obviates or delays drainage. Majority of nonresponders had disconnected pancreatic duct syndrome (DPDS). |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 14% |
| Colombia | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 5 | 71% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 43% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 29% |
| Scientists | 2 | 29% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| India | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 21 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 2 | 9% |
| Researcher | 2 | 9% |
| Lecturer | 2 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 5 | 23% |
| Unknown | 8 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 41% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 5% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 5% |
| Psychology | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 8 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 13 March 2018.
All research outputs
#5,188,619
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery
#337
of 2,485 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#61,184
of 279,171 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery
#3
of 61 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,485 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 279,171 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 61 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.