| Title |
When is the best time for temporary stoma closure in laparoscopic sphincter-saving surgery for rectal cancer? A study of 259 consecutive patients
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Techniques in Coloproctology, July 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10151-015-1328-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
M. N. Figueiredo, D. Mège, L. Maggiori, M. Ferron, Y. Panis |
| Abstract |
There is no consensus regarding the best timing for temporary stoma closure after proctectomy for rectal cancer, especially if the patient requires adjuvant chemotherapy. This study aimed to assess whether the timing of stoma closure could influence postoperative morbidity. Patients with rectal cancer undergoing laparoscopic proctectomy with temporary stoma were included and divided into three groups according to the delay of stoma closure after proctectomy: ≤60 days (Group A), 61-90 days (Group B), and >90 days (Group C). From 2008 to 2013, 259 patients (146 men, median age 61 years) were divided into Groups A (n = 65), B (n = 115), and C (n = 79). At the time of stoma closure, seven (11 %) patients received adjuvant chemotherapy in Group A versus 42 (37 %) in Group B (p = 0.0002) and 24 (30 %) in Group C (p = 0.004), and peristomal hernia was noted in four patients (6 %) in Group A versus 14 (12 %) in Group B and 21 (27 %) in Group C (p < 0.0001). Although overall postoperative morbidity was similar between groups, anastomotic leakage (at the stoma closure site) was noted in one patient in Group A versus zero in Group B versus four in Group C (p = 0.03). Median hospital stay was 5 days in Group A versus 6 in Group B versus 6 in Group C (p = 0.004). Our results suggested that timing of temporary stoma closure can influence postoperative morbidity. Best results were obtained if stoma closure was performed before 90 days, even during adjuvant chemotherapy. There is no benefit in delaying stoma closure after completion of adjuvant chemotherapy. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 35 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 6 | 17% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 14% |
| Other | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 4 | 11% |
| Unknown | 10 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 19 | 53% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 13 | 36% |
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 07 July 2015.
All research outputs
#17,764,580
of 22,816,807 outputs
Outputs from Techniques in Coloproctology
#1,029
of 1,263 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#176,901
of 263,464 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Techniques in Coloproctology
#14
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,816,807 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,263 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.5. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% 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 263,464 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 33 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 51% of its contemporaries.