↓ Skip to main content

Combining endoscopic submucosal dissection and endoscopic mucosal resection to treat neoplasia in Barrett’s esophagus

Overview of attention for article published in Surgical Endoscopy, April 2016
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
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
23 Mendeley
Title
Combining endoscopic submucosal dissection and endoscopic mucosal resection to treat neoplasia in Barrett’s esophagus
Published in
Surgical Endoscopy, April 2016
DOI 10.1007/s00464-016-4885-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ian Holmes, Tressia Hing, Shai Friedland

Abstract

Piecemeal endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is the standard treatment of nodular Barrett's esophagus dysplasia and T1a cancer. Piecemeal resection may be incomplete and makes precise histologic assessment difficult. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a technique that enables en-bloc resection but has not gained widespread acceptance due to its technical difficulty, risk and long procedure time. We developed a protocol consisting of a combination of a limited ESD with supplementary EMR in the same session if necessary, designed to increase en-bloc resection of the most worrisome neoplastic area while maximizing the rate of complete resection of dysplasia. Records of consecutive patients referred for treatment during a 2-year period were reviewed. Eleven patients were treated: two with ESD and nine with combined ESD/EMR. Eight patients had mucosal lesions; three patients had submucosally invasive cancer and were referred to surgery. Five of the 8 mucosal lesions were removed en-bloc by ESD with dysplasia-free margins. Two patients with T1a cancer had low-grade dysplasia in the ESD margins and removal of all dysplasia on EMR. One patient with T1a cancer had high-grade dysplasia in the ESD margins and on EMR. He required a second endoscopy to remove residual neoplasia. There were no adverse events. The mean procedure time was 66.4 ± 15.1 min. Combining a limited ESD with EMR in the same session enables efficient treatment of visible dysplastic lesions in Barrett's esophagus.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 23 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 4 17%
Other 3 13%
Student > Postgraduate 2 9%
Student > Master 2 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 4%
Other 3 13%
Unknown 8 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 39%
Computer Science 1 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 4%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 4%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 10 43%
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 08 August 2017.
All research outputs
#14,844,479
of 22,862,742 outputs
Outputs from Surgical Endoscopy
#3,575
of 6,049 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#170,864
of 300,876 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Surgical Endoscopy
#70
of 128 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,862,742 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,049 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 300,876 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 128 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.