↓ Skip to main content

Major predictors and management of small-bowel angioectasia

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Gastroenterology, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
53 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
34 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
Major predictors and management of small-bowel angioectasia
Published in
BMC Gastroenterology, August 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12876-015-0337-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Atsushi Igawa, Shiro Oka, Shinji Tanaka, Sayoko Kunihara, Makoto Nakano, Taiki Aoyama, Kazuaki Chayama

Abstract

Small-bowel angioectasias are frequently diagnosed with capsule endoscopy (CE) or balloon endoscopy however, major predictors have not been defined and the indications for endoscopic treatment have not been standardized. The aim of this study was to evaluate the predictors and management of small-bowel angioectasia. Among patients with obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (OGIB) who underwent both CE and double-balloon endoscopy at our institution, we enrolled 64 patients with small-bowel angioectasia (angioectasia group) and 97 patients without small-bowel angioectasia (non-angioectasia group). The angioectasia group was subdivided into patients with type 1a angioectasia (35 cases) and type 1b angioectasia (29 cases) according to the Yano-Yamamoto classification. Patient characteristics, treatment, and outcomes were evaluated. Age (P = 0.001), cardiovascular disease (P = 0.002), and liver cirrhosis (P = 0.003) were identified as significant predictors of small-bowel angioectasia. Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified cardiovascular disease (odds ratio 2.86; 95 % confidence interval, 1.35-6.18) and liver cirrhosis (odds ratio 4.81; 95 % confidence interval, 1.79-14.5) as independent predictors of small-bowel angioectasia. Eleven type 1a cases without oozing were treated conservatively, and 24 type 1a cases with oozing were treated with polidocanol injection (PDI). Re-bleeding occurred in two type 1a cases (6 %). Seventeen type 1b cases were treated with PDI and 12 type 1b cases were treated with PDI combined with argon plasma coagulation (APC) or clipping. Re-bleeding occurred in five type 1b cases (17 %) that resolved after additional endoscopic hemostasis in all cases. There was one adverse event from endoscopic treatment (1.6 %). Cardiovascular disease and liver cirrhosis were significant independent major predictors of small-bowel angioectasia. Type 1a angioectasias with oozing are indicated for PDI and type 1b angioectasias are indicated for PDI with APC or clipping.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 34 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 9 26%
Student > Postgraduate 6 18%
Student > Master 4 12%
Other 4 12%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 9%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 6 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 65%
Engineering 2 6%
Psychology 1 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Arts and Humanities 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 7 21%

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 2016.
All research outputs
#5,544,545
of 7,695,064 outputs
Outputs from BMC Gastroenterology
#447
of 683 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#143,316
of 228,793 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Gastroenterology
#19
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 7,695,064 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 683 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% 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 228,793 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 42 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.