↓ Skip to main content

Predictors of mortality in the elderly after open repair for perforated peptic ulcer disease

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Surgical Research, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
43 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.
Article details
Title
Predictors of mortality in the elderly after open repair for perforated peptic ulcer disease
Published in
Journal of Surgical Research, April 2017
DOI 10.1016/j.jss.2017.03.052
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

As the U.S. population ages and the number of emergent surgical repairs for perforated peptic ulcer disease (PUD) rise, contemporary national data evaluating operative outcomes for open surgical repair for perforated PUD among the elderly are lacking. The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (2007-2014) was queried for patients ≥65 y who underwent open surgical repair for perforated PUD. The primary outcome was 30-d mortality. Secondary outcomes included 30-d postoperative complications. Univariate and multivariable regression analyses were performed. Overall, 2131 patients underwent open surgical repair for perforated PUD. Among those who died, more used steroids preoperatively (15% versus 9%, P = 0.001) and fewer were independent preoperatively (55% versus 83%, P < 0.0001) compared to those who were alive 30-d postoperatively. Common postoperative complications were septic shock (15%) and pneumonia (12%). The overall 30-d mortality rate was 17.7%, with more deaths in subsequent decades of life (65-75 y 13% versus 75-84 y 18% versus >85 y 24%, P < 0.0001). After adjustment for other factors, mortality was significantly associated with older age (85+ versus 65-74 y) (odds ratio [OR], 1.5; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.8, 1.7), dependent functional status preoperatively ([OR], 0.2; 95% CI, 0.2, 0.3), and American Society of Anesthesiologist classification ≥4 (OR, 3.2; 95% CI, 2.4, 4.3). At U.S. hospitals, open surgical repair, the accepted treatment of perforated PUD, among the elderly is associated with significant 30-d morbidity and mortality rates that are unacceptably high in our contemporary era. Furthermore, mortality rates are associated with older age. Therefore, as the elderly population continues to increase in the United States, preoperative, perioperative, and postoperative measures must be taken to reduce this high morbidity and mortality rates.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 43 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 19%
Other 6 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Student > Bachelor 3 7%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 15 35%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 35%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 16%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 2%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 16 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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
#17,289,387
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Surgical Research
#3,645
of 5,779 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#207,085
of 324,628 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Surgical Research
#67
of 156 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,779 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% 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 324,628 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 156 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.