↓ Skip to main content

COPAIBA OIL INFLUENCES VENTRAL HERNIA REPAIR WITH VICRYL® MESH?

Overview of attention for article published in ABCD. Arquivos Brasileiros de Cirurgia Digestiva (São Paulo), January 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
15 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
COPAIBA OIL INFLUENCES VENTRAL HERNIA REPAIR WITH VICRYL® MESH?
Published in
ABCD. Arquivos Brasileiros de Cirurgia Digestiva (São Paulo), January 2015
DOI 10.1590/s0102-67202015000300010
Pubmed ID
Authors

Edson Yuzur Yasojima, Renan Kleber Costa Teixeira, Abdallah de Paula Houat, Felipe Lobato da Silva Costa, Vitor Nagai Yamaki, Denilson José Silva Feitosa-Junior, Carlos Augusto Moreira Silva, Marcus Vinicius Henriques Brito

Abstract

The use of meshes in hernia surgical repair promoted revolution in the surgical area; however, some difficulties had come, such as a large area of fibrosis, greater postoperative pain and risk of infection. The search for new substances that minimize these effects should be encouraged. Medicinal plants stand out due possible active ingredients that can act on these problems. To check the copaiba oil influence in the repair of abdominal defects in rats corrected with Vicryl(c) mesh. Twenty-four Wistar rats were submitted to an abdominal defect and corrected with Vicryl(c) mesh. They were distributed into two groups: control and copaíba via gavage, administered for seven days after surgery. The analysis of the animals took place on 8, 15 and 22 postoperative days. It analyzed the amount of adhesions and microscopic analysis of the mesh. There was no statistical difference regarding the amount of adhesions. All animals had signs of acute inflammation. In the control group, there were fewer macrophages in animals of the 8th compared to other days and greater amount of necrosis on day 8 than on day 22. In the copaiba group, the number of gigantocytes increased compared to the days analyzed. Copaiba oil showed an improvement in the inflammatory response accelerating its beginning; however, did not affect the amount of abdominal adhesions or collagen fibers.

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 readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 15 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 3 20%
Student > Bachelor 2 13%
Student > Master 2 13%
Professor 1 7%
Other 1 7%
Other 2 13%
Unknown 4 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 4 27%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 7%
Unknown 7 47%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 19 November 2021.
All research outputs
#16,398,226
of 25,887,951 outputs
Outputs from ABCD. Arquivos Brasileiros de Cirurgia Digestiva (São Paulo)
#85
of 293 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#201,932
of 361,878 outputs
Outputs of similar age from ABCD. Arquivos Brasileiros de Cirurgia Digestiva (São Paulo)
#13
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,887,951 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 293 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% 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 361,878 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its contemporaries.