| Title |
Significance of Nissen fundoplication after endoscopic radiofrequency ablation of Barrett’s esophagus
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Surgical Endoscopy, December 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00464-015-4677-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ognjan Skrobić, Aleksandar Simić, Nebojša Radovanović, Nenad Ivanović, Marjan Micev, Predrag Peško |
| Abstract |
HALO radiofrequency ablation (RFA) has been proven as safe and efficient in eradication of both non- and dysplastic Barrett's esophagus (BE). Definitive post-RFA treatment is yet to be determined. RFA was performed in 56 patients with BE, 38 with intestinal metaplasia (IM) and 18 with low-grade dysplasia (LGD), and repeated in case of residual BE. Length of the BE was classified according to C&M criteria. Follow-up included regular upper GI endoscopies with biopsies 6 months, 1 and 2 years after the complete resolution of BE. Patients were divided into two groups regarding post-RFA treatment: those maintaining proton pump inhibitors (PPI) daily and those submitted to laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication (LNF) at least 3 months after BE eradication or synchronous with RFA. There were no perforations or strictures related to RFA. Complete endoscopic resolution of BE was observed in 83.92 % patients (86.84 % IM and 77.77 % LGD), in 25 that maintained PPI and 22 in whom LNF was done. In PPI group, 2-year follow-up revealed BE recurrence in biopsy samples in 20 % of patients, while in LNF group 9.1 % of patients had recurrent IM. In overall sample of patients, no difference was noted regarding the influence of post-RFA treatment (p < 0.423). LNF proved superiority over PPI treatment in patients with long-segment BE (cutoff C > 4 cm, p < 0.021). HALO RFA is a safe procedure, with high rate of success in complete eradication of BE in symptomatic GERD patients. LNF provides good protection for neosquamous epithelium and in selected group of patients could be offered as a first line of treatment after HALO RFA. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 | 25% |
| Belgium | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 25% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 30 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 5 | 17% |
| Other | 4 | 13% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 4 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 7% |
| Professor | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 4 | 13% |
| Unknown | 9 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 14 | 47% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 2 | 7% |
| Decision Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 12 | 40% |
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 20 July 2017.
All research outputs
#12,821,848
of 22,835,198 outputs
Outputs from Surgical Endoscopy
#2,560
of 6,039 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#175,176
of 388,829 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Surgical Endoscopy
#29
of 137 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,835,198 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,039 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% 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 388,829 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 137 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.