↓ Skip to main content

Training in peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) for esophageal achalasia

Overview of attention for article published in Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management, July 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
92 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
57 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
Training in peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) for esophageal achalasia
Published in
Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management, July 2012
DOI 10.2147/tcrm.s32666
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nicholas Eleftheriadis, Haruhiro Inoue, Haruo Ikeda, Manabu Onimaru, Akira Yoshida, Toshihisa Hosoya, Roberta Maselli, Shin-ei Kudo

Abstract

Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) has been developed in the context of natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) as a minimally invasive endoscopic treatment for symptomatic esophageal achalasia, which is a chronic progressive benign disease with severe morbidity and difficult management. Since September 2008, POEM has been successfully performed in more than 200 consecutive patients with symptomatic achalasia at the Digestive Disease Center of Showa University, Northern Yokohama Hospital, Yokohama, Japan, with excellent short- and long-term results and absence of serious complications. International experience of POEM within clinical studies is also promising. According to these results, POEM is considered as a safe procedure that can be applied to all achalasia patients. However, the low incidence of achalasia (0.3%-1% per 100,000 population), in combination with the potential serious complications related to the technically demanding POEM procedure, has made training difficult. There is therefore an urgent need for an animal model for training to decrease the learning curve. Further, there are other ethical and training issues to address. The pig is the most appropriate animal model for training in POEM due to its anatomy being similar to that of humans. The porcine esophagus has the advantage of easy mobilization due to absence of tight junctions to surrounding organs. A non-survival porcine model would be a simple, inexpensive, and reproducible animal model for training in POEM, without the need for concern about complications. A possible training process might first involve observation of POEM performed by specialists, then training on non-survival and survival porcine models, followed by training in humans under specialist guidance and finally, performance of POEM in humans.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Colombia 1 2%
Germany 1 2%
Unknown 55 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 19%
Student > Bachelor 10 18%
Student > Postgraduate 8 14%
Other 7 12%
Student > Master 5 9%
Other 11 19%
Unknown 5 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 40 70%
Engineering 3 5%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 2%
Computer Science 1 2%
Other 3 5%
Unknown 7 12%
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 22 November 2012.
All research outputs
#22,759,802
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#1,204
of 1,323 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#159,966
of 176,747 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#6
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 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 1,323 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. 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 176,747 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 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.