↓ Skip to main content

Current Status of Small Bowel and Multivisceral Transplantation

Overview of attention for article published in Advances in Surgery, September 2008
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#42 of 159)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Readers on

mendeley
45 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
Current Status of Small Bowel and Multivisceral Transplantation
Published in
Advances in Surgery, September 2008
DOI 10.1016/j.yasu.2008.03.008
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Intestinal transplantation has shown exceptional growth over the past 20 years with remarkable progress. As with other solid organ transplants, intestinal transplantation has moved out of the experimental realm to become the stan dard of care for many patients with intestinal failure. Intestinal transplantation may soon be extended routinely to patients who, although not strictly meeting the criteria for intestinal failure, may benefit from intestinal transplantation, such as patients who have nonresectable indolent tumors or diffuse thrombosis of the portomesenteric system. As clinical experience has increased with intestinal transplantation, outcomes have improved. The currently reported 1-year graft and patient survival rate is 80%, which approaches that for other solid abdominal organs. Unfortunately, most of the gains in survival are seen in the first postoperative year, with long-term survival remaining basically unchanged since the early 1990s. With improved outcomes, more centers have entered into the intestinal transplant arena. In the United States alone, 20 centers performed at least one intestinal transplant in 2007. Increase in access to intestinal transplantation and more widespread awareness of this option likely will result in a consistent increase in the number of yearly transplants for the foreseeable future. Immunosuppressive regimens continue to evolve, with induction therapy being the major change in the past 5 years. Although rejection rates in the first year after transplant have been reduced by induction therapy, long-term side effects of heavy immunosuppression continue to weigh negatively on transplant outcomes. The future for immunosuppression lies in two areas: (1) individual monitoring of the immunosuppression level for each individual patient and (2) development of serum and tissue markers for the early identification of rejection. It is likely that a combination of technologies will allow immunosuppression to be tailored to each recipient. Development of these approaches to immunosuppression is necessary to predict graft dysfunction ahead of irreversible graft injury and allows adjustments in immunosuppression before the onset of rejection. Intestinal transplantation continues to be performed only in situations in which all other therapeutic modalities have failed. No randomized trials compare intestinal transplantation to long-term PN to establish guidelines for a timely referral for this treatment option. Late referral remains a crippling problem in the field of intestinal transplantation, with a great number of patients in need of simultaneous liver transplantation at the time of listing for intestinal transplantation. Early referral for isolated intestinal transplant will reduce the need for simultaneous multiorgan transplants and increase the residual organs available for patients in need of (primarily) liver transplantation.

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.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 45 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 45 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 5 11%
Professor 5 11%
Student > Master 5 11%
Other 4 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 9%
Other 18 40%
Unknown 4 9%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 35 78%
Social Sciences 2 4%
Engineering 2 4%
Computer Science 1 2%
Unknown 5 11%
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 08 November 2019.
All research outputs
#9,515,649
of 27,778,980 outputs
Outputs from Advances in Surgery
#42
of 159 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#39,635
of 103,977 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Advances in Surgery
#2
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 27,778,980 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 159 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.9. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% 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 103,977 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 7 of them.