↓ Skip to main content

A comparison of short-term outcomes between laparoscopic and open emergent repair of perforated peptic ulcers

Overview of attention for article published in Surgical Endoscopy, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
29 Mendeley
Title
A comparison of short-term outcomes between laparoscopic and open emergent repair of perforated peptic ulcers
Published in
Surgical Endoscopy, July 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00464-018-6341-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Daniel L. Davenport, Walker R. Ueland, Shyanie Kumar, Margaret Plymale, Andrew C. Bernard, J. Scott Roth

Abstract

We compared 30-day outcomes in patients undergoing emergent open and laparoscopic repair of perforated peptic ulcers in a large multicenter cohort. Prospectively obtained data in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program public use files from 2010 to 2016 were reviewed. Perioperative risks and outcomes were compared in unmatched and propensity-matched groups using parametric/non-parametric statistical tests as appropriate. A total of 4210 procedures were identified 345 (8.2%) laparoscopic and 3865 (91.8%) open. Laparoscopic repairs increased from 4.5% of 2010 cases to 11.4% of 2016 cases (p < .001). Open repair patients had more acute presentation including higher rates of ASA class, hypoalbuminemia, preoperative septic shock, dyspnea, and mechanical ventilation (all p < .01). Laparoscopic operations were longer than open procedures (p < .001). Mortality (8.5 vs. 3.5%), median length of stay (7 vs. 5 days), transfusion rates (13.7 vs. 7.0%), renal failure (3.7 vs. 1.2%), and respiratory failure (15.5 vs. 5.2%) were all worse in the unmatched open group (all p < .01). Propensity matching resulted in 342 laparoscopic and 626 open cases of similar ulcer type, demographics, ASA class, preoperative SIRS/sepsis, hypoalbuminemia, and wound class. Mortality was similar between matched groups (5.0 vs. 3.5%, p = .331). Median length of stay was longer in the open group (6 vs. 5 days, p < .001), which also had higher rates of prolonged ventilation/reintubation (9.6 vs. 5.3%, p = .019) and abdominal wall wound occurrences (6.2 vs. 2.3%, p = .042). Return to the operating room and 30-day readmissions did not differ between the matched groups. Emergent laparoscopic repair of perforated peptic ulcer is increasingly being performed, is safe relative to open repair (in patients without preoperative septic shock), and confers a modest benefit in terms of length of stay, respiratory, and abdominal wall wound complications.

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 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 29 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 5 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 14%
Researcher 3 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 7%
Student > Postgraduate 2 7%
Other 4 14%
Unknown 9 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 38%
Unspecified 1 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 3%
Computer Science 1 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 12 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 17 July 2018.
All research outputs
#14,421,028
of 23,096,849 outputs
Outputs from Surgical Endoscopy
#3,288
of 6,123 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#185,412
of 326,766 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Surgical Endoscopy
#65
of 108 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,096,849 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,123 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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 326,766 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 108 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.