↓ Skip to main content

A Prospective Randomized Study on the Risk of Bacteremia in Banding versus Sclerotherapy of Esophageal Varices

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Medicine, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
7 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
A Prospective Randomized Study on the Risk of Bacteremia in Banding versus Sclerotherapy of Esophageal Varices
Published in
Frontiers in Medicine, May 2016
DOI 10.3389/fmed.2016.00016
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marc J. Zuckerman, Yi Jia, Jesus A. Hernandez, Venkateswara R. Kolli, Arturo Norte, Hemal Amin, Nancy A. Casner, Alok Dwivedi, Hoi Ho

Abstract

Esophageal variceal banding may be less likely to cause bacteremia than sclerotherapy. The existing data about the frequency of bacteremia after esophageal variceal banding are conflicting, and few studies include both banding and sclerotherapy. We conducted a prospective randomized controlled trial to compare the frequency of bacteremia after esophageal variceal banding and sclerotherapy. Over a 2-year period, patients with liver disease admitted for upper gastrointestinal bleeding or for outpatient elective variceal therapy were enrolled. New patients were randomized preprocedure to either banding or sclerotherapy, and subsequent sessions utilized the initial procedure. The groups consisted of banding, sclerotherapy, and endoscopy without variceal therapy. Subjects underwent endoscopy by one out of three gastroenterologists. Blood cultures were obtained 5 min before and 30 min after endoscopy to check for bacteremia. Postendoscopic blood cultures were positive following 4 out of 139 (2.9%) sessions: 1 sclerotherapy and 3 control sessions. All postendoscopic positive blood cultures were found following emergency sessions (4/92, 4.3%). One pre-endoscopic blood culture was positive in a patient with emergency banding. The rates of positive postendoscopic blood cultures among groups with emergency banding (0/22, 0%), emergency sclerotherapy (1/41, 2.3%), and emergency control (3/29, 10.3%) were not significantly different. Postendoscopic positive blood cultures were not found after elective sessions with either banding or sclerotherapy. Postendoscopic bacteremia was infrequent following emergency endoscopy in patients with esophageal variceal bleeding. Bacteremia was not found after esophageal variceal banding, although this was not significantly less frequent than after sclerotherapy. Postendoscopic bacteremia was not associated with elective variceal therapy.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 7 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 2 29%
Student > Bachelor 1 14%
Other 1 14%
Student > Master 1 14%
Unknown 2 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 4 57%
Computer Science 1 14%
Unknown 2 29%
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 04 July 2016.
All research outputs
#18,465,704
of 22,880,230 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Medicine
#3,938
of 5,694 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#218,432
of 298,472 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Medicine
#7
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,880,230 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 5,694 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.0. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% 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 298,472 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.