↓ Skip to main content

Liver transplantation in glycogen storage disease type I

Overview of attention for article published in Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, April 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
61 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
79 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
Liver transplantation in glycogen storage disease type I
Published in
Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, April 2014
DOI 10.1186/1750-1172-9-47
Pubmed ID
Authors

Susanna JB Boers, Gepke Visser, Peter GPA Smit, Sabine A Fuchs

Abstract

Glycogen storage disease type I (GSDI), an inborn error of carbohydrate metabolism, is caused by defects in the glucose-6-transporter/glucose-6-phosphatase complex, which is essential in glucose homeostasis. Two types exist, GSDIa and GSDIb, each caused by different defects in the complex. GSDIa is characterized by fasting intolerance and subsequent metabolic derangements. In addition to these clinical manifestations, patients with GSDIb suffer from neutropenia with neutrophil dysfunction and inflammatory bowel disease.With the feasibility of novel cell-based therapies, including hepatocyte transplantations and liver stem cell transplantations, it is essential to consider long term outcomes of liver replacement therapy. We reviewed all GSDI patients with liver transplantation identified in literature and through personal communication with treating physicians. Our review shows that all 80 GSDI patients showed improved metabolic control and normal fasting tolerance after liver transplantation. Although some complications might be caused by disease progression, most complications seemed related to the liver transplantation procedure and subsequent immune suppression. These results highlight the potential of other therapeutic strategies, like cell-based therapies for liver replacement, which are expected to normalize liver function with a lower risk of complications of the procedure and immune suppression.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 79 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 16 20%
Student > Master 11 14%
Other 7 9%
Student > Postgraduate 7 9%
Researcher 6 8%
Other 16 20%
Unknown 16 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 35 44%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 3%
Other 6 8%
Unknown 18 23%
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 14 May 2014.
All research outputs
#18,370,767
of 22,753,345 outputs
Outputs from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#2,129
of 2,610 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#165,370
of 228,038 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#24
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,753,345 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 2,610 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% 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 228,038 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.