↓ Skip to main content

Grading operative findings at laparoscopic cholecystectomy- a new scoring system

Overview of attention for article published in World Journal of Emergency Surgery, March 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#45 of 184)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (56th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
35 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
83 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
Grading operative findings at laparoscopic cholecystectomy- a new scoring system
Published in
World Journal of Emergency Surgery, March 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13017-015-0005-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael Sugrue, Shaheel M Sahebally, Luca Ansaloni, Martin D Zielinski

Abstract

Variation in outcomes from surgery is a major challenge and defining surgical findings may help set benchmarks, which currently do not exist in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. This study outlines a new surgical scoring system incorporating key operative findings. English language studies (from January 1965 to July 2014) pertaining to severity scoring and predictors of difficult laparoscopic cholecystectomy were searched for in PubMed, Embase and Cochrane databases using the search terms 'Laparoscopic cholecystectomy or Lap chole' and/or 'Scoring Index or Grading system or Prediction of difficulty or Conversion to open' in various combinations. Cross-referencing from papers retrieved in the original search identified additional articles. Sixteen published papers report a gallbladder (GB) scoring system, but all relate to pre-operative clinical and imaging findings, rather than operative findings. The current scoring system, using operative findings incorporates the appearance of the GB, presence of GB distension, ease of access, potential biliary complications and time taken to identify cystic duct and artery. A score of <2 would imply mild difficulty, 2-4 moderate, 5-7 severe and 8-10 extreme. This paper reports one of the first operative classifications of findings at laparoscopic cholecystectomy. It has the potential to allow benchmarks for international collaboration of operative and patient outcomes in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 83 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
Egypt 1 1%
Unknown 80 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 21 25%
Other 12 14%
Researcher 10 12%
Student > Bachelor 7 8%
Student > Master 7 8%
Other 17 20%
Unknown 9 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 66 80%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 2%
Psychology 1 1%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 1%
Unknown 13 16%

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 23 April 2015.
All research outputs
#2,081,011
of 5,030,595 outputs
Outputs from World Journal of Emergency Surgery
#45
of 184 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#61,354
of 149,018 outputs
Outputs of similar age from World Journal of Emergency Surgery
#3
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 5,030,595 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 56th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 184 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 71% 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 149,018 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 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 72% of its contemporaries.