↓ Skip to main content

Sarcopenia and sarcopenic obesity: do they predict inferior oncologic outcomes after gastrointestinal cancer surgery?

Overview of attention for article published in Perioperative Medicine, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Readers on

mendeley
107 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
Sarcopenia and sarcopenic obesity: do they predict inferior oncologic outcomes after gastrointestinal cancer surgery?
Published in
Perioperative Medicine, October 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13741-016-0052-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kimberly L. Mei, John A. Batsis, Jeannine B. Mills, Stefan D. Holubar

Abstract

Sarcopenia, or loss of skeletal muscle mass and quality, has been studied as part of aging and adverse health outcomes in elderly patients but has only recently been evaluated as a separate condition in cancer patients and important indicator of adverse outcomes. Currently, its definition and method of assessment are still being debated. Sarcopenia within an increasingly obese population has led to a subgroup with sarcopenic obesity, at even higher risk of adverse outcomes. Yet, sarcopenia often goes undiagnosed in these patients, hidden beneath higher body mass index. Identifying sarcopenic and sarcopenic obese subpopulations would allow for more effective treatment plans and potential avoidance of suboptimal outcomes, as well as the chance to intervene and combat these modifiable risk factors. This review will examine available literature on the definition and methods of evaluating sarcopenia and sarcopenic obesity, summarize the effectiveness of sarcopenia and sarcopenic obesity as predictors of outcomes after gastrointestinal cancer surgery, including colorectal cancer resection, liver resection, and pancreatic resection, and outline strategies to minimize the impact of sarcopenia. It is clear that untreated sarcopenia and sarcopenic obesity can be associated with suboptimal post-operative outcomes, especially infections and disease-free or overall survival.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 107 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 107 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 18 17%
Student > Bachelor 18 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 12%
Researcher 12 11%
Other 9 8%
Other 18 17%
Unknown 19 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 57 53%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 2%
Sports and Recreations 2 2%
Arts and Humanities 1 <1%
Other 7 7%
Unknown 29 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 11 December 2016.
All research outputs
#13,250,254
of 22,899,952 outputs
Outputs from Perioperative Medicine
#114
of 243 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#160,346
of 314,048 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Perioperative Medicine
#4
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,899,952 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 243 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% 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 314,048 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.