↓ Skip to main content

Laparoscopy is an available alternative to open surgery in the treatment of perforated peptic ulcers: a retrospective multicenter study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Surgery, September 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
25 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
Laparoscopy is an available alternative to open surgery in the treatment of perforated peptic ulcers: a retrospective multicenter study
Published in
BMC Surgery, September 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12893-018-0413-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Antonino Mirabella, Tiziana Fiorentini, Roberta Tutino, Nicolò Falco, Tommaso Fontana, Paolino De Marco, Eliana Gulotta, Leonardo Gulotta, Leo Licari, Giuseppe Salamone, Irene Melfa, Gregorio Scerrino, Massimo Lupo, Armando Speciale, Gianfranco Cocorullo

Abstract

Perforated peptic ulcers (PPU) remain one of the most frequent causes of death. Their incidence are largely unchanged accounting for 2-4% of peptic ulcers and remain the second most frequent abdominal cause of perforation and of indication for gastric emergency surgery. The minimally invasive approach has been proposed to treat PPU however some concerns on the offered advantages remain. Data on 184 consecutive patients undergoing surgery for PPU were collected. Likewise, perioperative data including shock at admission and interval between admission and surgery to evaluate the Boey's score. It was recorded the laparoscopic or open treatments, the type of surgical procedure, the length of the operation, the intensive care needed, and the length of hospital stay. Post-operative morbidity and mortality relation with patient's age, surgical technique and Boey's score were evaluated. The relationship between laparoscopic or open treatment and the Boey's score was statistically significant (p = 0.000) being the open technique used for the low-mid group in 41.1% and high score group in 100% and laparoscopy in 58.6% and 0%, respectively. Postoperative complications occurred in 9.7% of patients which were related to the patients' Boey's score, 4.7% in the low-mid score group and 21.4% in the high risk score group (p = 0.000). In contrast morbidity was not related to the chosen technique being 12.8% in open technique and 5.3% in laparoscopic one (p = 0.092, p > 0.05). 30-day post-operative mortality was 3.8% and occurred in the 0.8% of low-mid Boey's score group and in the 10.7% of the high Boey's score group (p = 0.001). In respect to the surgical technique it occurred in 6.4% of open procedures and in any case in the Lap one (p = 0.043). Finally, there was a statistically significant difference in morbidity and mortality between patients < 70 and > 70 years old (p = 0.000; p = 0.002). Laparoscopy tends to be an alternative method to open surgery in the treatment of perforated peptic ulcer. Morbidity and mortality were essentially related to Boey's score. In our series laparoscopy was not used in high risk Boey's score patients and it will be interesting to evaluate its usefulness in high risk patients in large randomized controlled trials.

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 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 25 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 4 16%
Other 3 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 12%
Student > Postgraduate 2 8%
Researcher 2 8%
Other 4 16%
Unknown 7 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 52%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 4%
Unspecified 1 4%
Linguistics 1 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 4%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 8 32%
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 26 September 2018.
All research outputs
#18,649,666
of 23,103,903 outputs
Outputs from BMC Surgery
#631
of 1,341 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#261,062
of 341,066 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Surgery
#21
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,103,903 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,341 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.8. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% 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 341,066 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 38 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.