↓ Skip to main content

Nutritional Status and Nutritional Support Before and After Pancreatectomy for Pancreatic Cancer and Chronic Pancreatitis

Overview of attention for article published in Indian Journal of Surgical Oncology, October 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
38 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
115 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
Nutritional Status and Nutritional Support Before and After Pancreatectomy for Pancreatic Cancer and Chronic Pancreatitis
Published in
Indian Journal of Surgical Oncology, October 2012
DOI 10.1007/s13193-012-0189-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Vasiliki Th. Karagianni, Apostolos E. Papalois, John K. Triantafillidis

Abstract

Cachexia, malnutrition, significant weight loss, and reduction in food intake due to anorexia represent the most important pathophysiological consequences of pancreatic cancer. Pathophysiological consequences result also from pancreatectomy, the type and severity of which differ significantly and depend on the type of the operation performed. Nutritional intervention, either parenteral or enteral, needs to be seen as a method of support in pancreatic cancer patients aiming at the maintenance of the nutritional and functional status and the prevention or attenuation of cachexia. Oral nutrition could reduce complications while restoring quality of life. Enteral nutrition in the post-operative period could also reduce infective complications. The evidence for immune-enhanced feed in patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic cancer is supported by the available clinical data. Nutritional support during the post-operative period on a cyclical basis is preferred because it is associated with low incidence of gastric stasis. Postoperative total parenteral nutrition is indicated only to those patients who are unable to be fed orally or enterally. Thus nutritional deficiency is a relatively widesoread and constant finding suggesting that we must optimise the nutritional status both before and after surgery.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users 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 115 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 115 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 18 16%
Student > Bachelor 14 12%
Student > Postgraduate 9 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 8 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 6%
Other 25 22%
Unknown 34 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 36 31%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 10%
Unspecified 7 6%
Psychology 5 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 4 3%
Other 16 14%
Unknown 36 31%
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 01 April 2017.
All research outputs
#14,183,419
of 22,733,113 outputs
Outputs from Indian Journal of Surgical Oncology
#100
of 299 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#106,524
of 183,691 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Indian Journal of Surgical Oncology
#2
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,733,113 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 299 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 183,691 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.