Obesity has been implicated as an important risk factor for fundoplication failure. However, the mechanism of fundoplication in obese patients is not fully understood. Our objective is to evaluate the patterns of failure in relation to the body mass index (BMI) undergoing re-operative intervention after failed fundoplication.
After Institutional Review Board approval, the patients who underwent re-operative intervention for failed fundoplication between November 2008 and December 2013 were identified. Patients were classified into three groups: non-obese, obese, and morbidly obese (<30, 30-35, >35 BMI, respectively). Pre-operative assessment and operative procedure performed were compared between the groups.
One hundred twenty-four patients satisfied study criteria. Non-obese patients (53.2 %) had significantly more dysphagia as an indication for re-operative procedure (obese 31.6 %, p < 0.05; morbidly 16.7 %, p < 0.05). Obese and morbidly obese patients had significantly higher incidence of recurrent hiatal hernia than non-obese patients (88.7 vs. 65.6 %, p < 0.05). Morbidly obese patients had significantly higher incidence of disrupted fundoplication than non-obese patients (41.7 vs. 19.4 %, p < 0.05).
Similar anatomical failure patterns of state of fundoplication and recurrent hiatal hernia were noted between obese patients and morbidly obese patients and were distinct from non-obese patients.
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 05 August 2015.
All research outputs
#22,756,649
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery
#2,082
of 2,484 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#235,826
of 275,650 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery
#35
of 58 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,484 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 275,650 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 58 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
