↓ Skip to main content

Early oral intake after total laryngectomy does not increase pharyngocutaneous fistulization

Overview of attention for article published in European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, April 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
f1000
1 research highlight platform

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
34 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Early oral intake after total laryngectomy does not increase pharyngocutaneous fistulization
Published in
European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, April 2013
DOI 10.1007/s00405-013-2524-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

A. Jacqueline Timmermans, Liset Lansaat, Gertruda V. J. Kroon, Olga Hamming-Vrieze, Frans J. M. Hilgers, Michiel W. M. van den Brekel

Abstract

Timing of oral intake after total laryngectomy (TLE) is mostly delayed until postoperative day 10-12, under the assumption that this limits the incidence of pharyngocutaneous fistulization (PCF). However, early oral intake could be advantageous and could reduce costs, providing that it does not lead to increased PCF. Comparison of PCF incidence in traditional 'late' oral intake protocol (start at postoperative day 10-12; LOI) and in early oral intake protocol (start at postoperative day 2-4; EOI). Retrospective cohort study comparing two different oral intake protocols in 247 consecutive patients laryngectomized between early 2000 until mid 2006 (LOI; N = 140), and mid 2006 until mid 2012 (EOI; N = 107). Both groups were comparable in terms of sex, age, origin of tumor, and TLE indication, except for the American Society of Anesthesiologists score (ASA), which was slightly more favorable in the LOI group (p = 0.047). Compliance with the oral intake protocols during both periods was good: the median day of starting oral intake was day 11 (range 6-103) in the LOI group vs. day 3 (range 2-84) in the EOI group (p = 0.001). The incidence of PCF was not significantly different between the two groups (25% for LOI and 32% for EOI; Fisher's exact: p = 0.255). In addition, no association was observed between the timing of oral intake and PCF (HR = 0.995; CI 0.98-1.01; p = 0.364). This study suggests that early oral intake is safe and does not increase pharyngocutaneous fistulization.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 34 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 7 21%
Student > Master 4 12%
Other 3 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 9%
Professor 2 6%
Other 5 15%
Unknown 10 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 53%
Unspecified 1 3%
Psychology 1 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Unknown 13 38%
Attention Score in Context

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 05 March 2014.
All research outputs
#12,584,192
of 22,708,120 outputs
Outputs from European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology
#773
of 3,041 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#95,619
of 193,472 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology
#12
of 54 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,708,120 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,041 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 193,472 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 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 54 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.