↓ Skip to main content

Impact of Drain Insertion After Perforated Peptic Ulcer Repair in a Japanese Nationwide Database Analysis

Overview of attention for article published in World Journal of Surgery, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (52nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
21 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
Impact of Drain Insertion After Perforated Peptic Ulcer Repair in a Japanese Nationwide Database Analysis
Published in
World Journal of Surgery, September 2017
DOI 10.1007/s00268-017-4211-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

K. Okumura, K. Hida, S. Kunisawa, T. Nishigori, H. Hosogi, Y. Sakai, Y. Imanaka

Abstract

Many perforated peptic ulcers (PPUs) require surgical repair due to diffuse peritonitis. However, few studies have examined the clinical effects of postoperative drainage after PPU repair. This study aimed to investigate the drain insertion rates in patients who underwent PPU repair in Japan, and to clarify the impact of drain insertion on the postoperative clinical course. A retrospective nationwide cohort study was performed using administrative claims data of patients who had undergone PPU repair between 2010 and 2016. These patients were divided into two groups based on whether or not they had received a postoperative abdominal drain. Using propensity score matching, we compared the incidences of postoperative interventions for abdominal complications between both groups. A total of 4869 patients from 324 hospitals were analyzed. At the hospital level, drains were placed in all PPU repair patients in 229 (70.7%) hospitals. At the patient level, 4401 patients (90.4%) had drains inserted. The drain group was associated with a higher emergency admission rate, poorer preoperative shock status, longer anesthetic time, and a higher amount of intra-abdominal irrigation. In the propensity score-matched patients, the drain group had a significantly lower incidence of postoperative interventions than the no-drain group (1.9 vs. 5.6%; risk ratio = 0.35; 95% confidence interval 0.16-0.73; P = 0.003). Postoperative drainage was performed in the majority of patients who underwent PPU repair in Japan. Drainage following PPU repair may facilitate patient recovery by reducing the need for postoperative interventions.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 21 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 14%
Student > Master 3 14%
Student > Postgraduate 2 10%
Other 2 10%
Lecturer 1 5%
Other 3 14%
Unknown 7 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 57%
Social Sciences 1 5%
Engineering 1 5%
Unknown 7 33%
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 23 July 2020.
All research outputs
#13,872,459
of 24,542,484 outputs
Outputs from World Journal of Surgery
#2,515
of 4,485 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#152,132
of 322,672 outputs
Outputs of similar age from World Journal of Surgery
#48
of 93 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,542,484 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 4,485 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 322,672 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 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 93 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.