↓ Skip to main content

Significance of prophylactic intra-abdominal drain placement after laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer

Overview of attention for article published in World Journal of Surgical Oncology, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
24 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
Significance of prophylactic intra-abdominal drain placement after laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer
Published in
World Journal of Surgical Oncology, May 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12957-015-0591-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Noriyuki Hirahara, Takeshi Matsubara, Hikota Hayashi, Kiyoe Takai, Yusuke Fujii, Yoshitsugu Tajima

Abstract

Unnecessary intra-abdominal drain insertion must be avoided, but little is known about the value of prophylactic drainage following laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (LDG). In this study, we investigated the significance of prophylactic drain placement after LDG for gastric cancer. Seventy-eight consecutive patients with gastric cancer who underwent LDG in our department were retrospectively analyzed. The patients were divided into two groups according to the insertion of a prophylactic intra-abdominal drain following LDG. The 'drain group' comprised 45 patients with routine use of a prophylactic intra-abdominal drain, and the 'no-drain group' comprised 33 patients who did not undergo placement of an intra-abdominal drain. There were no significant differences in terms of the mean age of the patients, male/female ratio, body mass index, and concurrent diseases between the drain group and the no-drain group. In addition, there were no significant differences in the tumor location, tumor diameter, depth of the tumor, nodal metastasis, and tumor stage between the two groups. All patients in each group were successfully treated with R0 surgery, and no patient required conversion to open surgery. Surgery-related factors, including lymph node dissection and operative time, were similar in the drain group and the no-drain group. A comparison of the amount of intraoperative blood loss between patients with and without postoperative complications revealed that patients who experienced postoperative complications had a significantly larger amount of blood loss than those without postoperative complications. A comparison of operative times between patients with and without surgery-related postoperative local complications revealed that patients who experienced surgery-related postoperative local complications had a significantly longer operative time than those without surgery-related postoperative local complications. Analysis of operative times in each group revealed that patients with surgery-related postoperative local complications had a significantly longer operative time than those without surgery-related postoperative local complications in the no-drain group. Intraoperative factors such as the operative time and the amount of intraoperative blood loss affected the occurrence of postoperative complications following LDG. A prophylactic drain may thus be useful in patients at higher risk and in those with a longer operative time or massive intraoperative bleeding.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 24 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 2 8%
Student > Bachelor 2 8%
Student > Postgraduate 2 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 8%
Other 1 4%
Other 3 13%
Unknown 12 50%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 38%
Unspecified 1 4%
Psychology 1 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 4%
Social Sciences 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 10 42%
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 12 May 2015.
All research outputs
#18,409,030
of 22,803,211 outputs
Outputs from World Journal of Surgical Oncology
#1,011
of 2,043 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#192,069
of 264,485 outputs
Outputs of similar age from World Journal of Surgical Oncology
#32
of 56 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,803,211 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 2,043 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.1. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% 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 264,485 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 56 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.