↓ Skip to main content

Initial experience of reduced port surgery using a two-surgeon technique for colorectal cancer

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Surgery, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
7 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
Initial experience of reduced port surgery using a two-surgeon technique for colorectal cancer
Published in
BMC Surgery, July 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12893-015-0078-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jo Tashiro, Shigeki Yamaguchi, Toshimasa Ishii, Hiroka Kondo, Kiyoka Hara, Ryuichi Kuwahara

Abstract

With the decreasing number of surgeons on surgical teams, reduced port surgery (RPS) operations have become popular. We herein present our initial experience with RPS, which was successfully performed using a two-surgeon technique. A retrospective analysis was performed to compare the two-surgeon technique with conventional laparoscopic colectomy and evaluate its efficacy. A total of 535 patients were eligible among 749 registered patients. Conventional multiport laparoscopic colectomy with three surgeons and RPS using the two-surgeon technique with a surgeon and surgeon's assistant were performed in 429 and 106 cases, respectively. The patient characteristics, short-term outcomes (including intraoperative and postoperative findings) and pathological results were recorded and analyzed. The two groups were similar with respect to age, gender, BMI, history of abdominal surgery, depth of tumor invasion and TNM classification. Reconstruction via extracorporeal functional end-to-end anastomosis was performed in a significantly higher number of patients in the two-surgeon technique group (74 %) than in the conventional laparoscopic colectomy group (57 %). Furthermore, the mean operative time in the two-surgeon technique group (117.9 min) was significantly shorter than that observed in the conventional laparoscopic colectomy group (170 min), and the median postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter in the two-surgeon technique group (6 days) than in the conventional laparoscopic colectomy group (7 days). There were no major postoperative complications. The final TNM stage was similar in both procedures. RPS using the two-surgeon technique compares favorably with conventional laparoscopic colectomy and is considered to be a safe and successful procedure.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 7 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 2 29%
Student > Bachelor 1 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 14%
Professor 1 14%
Student > Postgraduate 1 14%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 1 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 71%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 14%
Unknown 1 14%
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 30 July 2015.
All research outputs
#18,420,033
of 22,818,766 outputs
Outputs from BMC Surgery
#615
of 1,320 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#189,084
of 263,145 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Surgery
#17
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,818,766 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 1,320 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.8. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 263,145 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 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.