| Title |
High risk of fistula formation in vacuum-assisted closure therapy in patients with open abdomen due to secondary peritonitis—a retrospective analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery, May 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00423-016-1443-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ioannis Mintziras, Michael Miligkos, Detlef Klaus Bartsch |
| Abstract |
The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of vacuum-assisted closure therapy in patients with open abdomen due to secondary peritonitis and to identify possible risk factors of fistula formation. The hospital OPS-database (time period 2005-2014) was searched to identify patients treated with an open abdomen due to secondary peritonitis, who underwent vacuum-assisted closure therapy. Medical records were retrospectively analyzed for patients' characteristics, cause of peritonitis, duration of vacuum therapy, number of relaparotomies, fascial closure rates, and risk factors of fistula formation. Forty-three patients (19 male, 24 female) with a median age of 65 years (range 24-90 years) were identified. The major cause of secondary peritonitis was anastomotic leakage after intestinal anastomosis or bowel perforation, the median APACHE II score was 11. Median duration of VAC treatment was 12 days (range 3-88 days). Twenty of 43 (47 %) patients died from septic complications. Delayed fascial closure was obtained by suturing in 20 of 43 patients (47 %). Overall 16 of 43 (37 %) patients developed enteroatmospheric fistulas. Re-explorations after starting VAC treatment and duration of VAC therapy were significantly associated with the occurrence of enteroatmospheric fistulas (p < 0.001). ROC curve analysis determined the optimal duration of VAC therapy to reduce the risk of fistula formation at 13 days. Long-term VAC treatment of patients with an open abdomen due to secondary peritonitis results in a relatively low fascial closure rate and a high risk of fistula formation. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Belgium | 3 | 50% |
| Unknown | 3 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 33% |
| Scientists | 2 | 33% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 45 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 7 | 15% |
| Other | 5 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 11 | 24% |
| Unknown | 14 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 22 | 48% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 4% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 2% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 2% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 19 | 41% |
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 29 August 2017.
All research outputs
#12,955,227
of 22,867,327 outputs
Outputs from Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery
#447
of 1,129 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#137,596
of 298,934 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery
#10
of 60 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,867,327 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,129 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% 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 298,934 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 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 60 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.