↓ Skip to main content

Hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery compared with open resection for mid and low rectal cancer: a case-matched study with long-term follow-up

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

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
33 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
Hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery compared with open resection for mid and low rectal cancer: a case-matched study with long-term follow-up
Published in
World Journal of Surgical Oncology, June 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12957-015-0616-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Xile Zhou, Fanlong Liu, Caizhao Lin, Qihan You, Jinsong Yang, Wenbin Chen, Jiahe Xu, Jianjiang Lin, Xiangming Xu

Abstract

This study was designed to compare the long-term surgical outcomes of patients with mid and low rectal cancer after open or hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS). A case-matched controlled prospective analysis of 116 patients who underwent hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS) for stage I to III mid and low rectal cancer from 2005 to 2010 was performed. Contemporary patients who underwent open rectal surgery were matched to the HALS group at the ratio of 1:1. The perioperative clinical outcomes, postoperative pathology, and survival outcomes were compared between the groups. The patient characteristics between the two groups were comparable. Ninety patients in the open group and 85 in the HALS group received sphincter-preserving surgery. HALS resulted in less blood loss and wound infection, faster return to oral diet, shorter postoperative hospital stay, and longer operating time. The two groups had similar complication rates. Lymph node retrieval and involvement of circumferential and distal margins were similar for both procedures. Cumulative incidences of locoregional recurrence, disease-free, or overall survival rates were statistically similar. This study suggests that HALS for mid and low rectal cancer is acceptable in terms of short-term clinical outcomes and long-term survival results.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 3%
Unknown 32 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 6 18%
Student > Master 5 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 6%
Researcher 2 6%
Other 5 15%
Unknown 9 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 48%
Unspecified 2 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 6%
Computer Science 1 3%
Environmental Science 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 11 33%
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 10 June 2015.
All research outputs
#18,414,796
of 22,811,321 outputs
Outputs from World Journal of Surgical Oncology
#1,011
of 2,043 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#192,381
of 266,634 outputs
Outputs of similar age from World Journal of Surgical Oncology
#27
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,811,321 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 266,634 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 50 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.