↓ Skip to main content

2017 WSES guidelines for the management of iatrogenic colonoscopy perforation

Overview of attention for article published in World Journal of Emergency Surgery, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

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
2017 WSES guidelines for the management of iatrogenic colonoscopy perforation
Published in
World Journal of Emergency Surgery, January 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13017-018-0162-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nicola de’Angelis, Salomone Di Saverio, Osvaldo Chiara, Massimo Sartelli, Aleix Martínez-Pérez, Franca Patrizi, Dieter G. Weber, Luca Ansaloni, Walter Biffl, Offir Ben-Ishay, Miklosh Bala, Francesco Brunetti, Federica Gaiani, Solafah Abdalla, Aurelien Amiot, Hany Bahouth, Giorgio Bianchi, Daniel Casanova, Federico Coccolini, Raul Coimbra, Gian Luigi de’Angelis, Belinda De Simone, Gustavo P. Fraga, Pietro Genova, Rao Ivatury, Jeffry L. Kashuk, Andrew W. Kirkpatrick, Yann Le Baleur, Fernando Machado, Gustavo M. Machain, Ronald V. Maier, Alain Chichom-Mefire, Riccardo Memeo, Carlos Mesquita, Juan Carlos Salamea Molina, Massimiliano Mutignani, Ramiro Manzano-Núñez, Carlos Ordoñez, Andrew B. Peitzman, Bruno M. Pereira, Edoardo Picetti, Michele Pisano, Juan Carlos Puyana, Sandro Rizoli, Mohammed Siddiqui, Iradj Sobhani, Richard P. ten Broek, Luigi Zorcolo, Maria Clotilde Carra, Yoram Kluger, Fausto Catena

Abstract

Iatrogenic colonoscopy perforation (ICP) is a severe complication that can occur during both diagnostic and therapeutic procedures. Although 45-60% of ICPs are diagnosed by the endoscopist while performing the colonoscopy, many ICPs are not immediately recognized but are instead suspected on the basis of clinical signs and symptoms that occur after the endoscopic procedure. There are three main therapeutic options for ICPs: endoscopic repair, conservative therapy, and surgery. The therapeutic approach must vary based on the setting of the diagnosis (intra- or post-colonoscopy), the type of ICP, the characteristics and general status of the patient, the operator's level of experience, and surgical device availability. Although ICPs have been the focus of numerous publications, no guidelines have been created to standardize the management of ICPs. The aim of this article is to present the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) guidelines for the management of ICP, which are intended to be used as a tool to promote global standards of care in case of ICP. These guidelines are not meant to substitute providers' clinical judgment for individual patients, and they may need to be modified based on the medical team's level of experience and the availability of local resources.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 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 > Postgraduate 13 12%
Other 12 11%
Student > Bachelor 9 8%
Student > Master 8 7%
Researcher 8 7%
Other 33 31%
Unknown 24 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 60 56%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 3%
Engineering 2 2%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Other 2 2%
Unknown 36 34%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 June 2018.
All research outputs
#3,160,121
of 13,122,094 outputs
Outputs from World Journal of Emergency Surgery
#76
of 343 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#96,930
of 346,765 outputs
Outputs of similar age from World Journal of Emergency Surgery
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,122,094 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 343 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 346,765 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 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them