↓ Skip to main content

Cytoreductive surgery and perioperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy for peritoneal carcinomatosis in the elderly

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

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 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
Cytoreductive surgery and perioperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy for peritoneal carcinomatosis in the elderly
Published in
World Journal of Surgical Oncology, August 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12957-015-0682-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yeqian Huang, Nayef A. Alzahrani, Saleh E. Alzahrani, Jing Zhao, Winston Liauw, David L. Morris

Abstract

Peritoneal carcinomatosis is life-threatening without cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and perioperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy (PIC). Only a few studies in the literature addressed the relationship between age and outcomes of peritonectomy. This study was designed to review the clinical outcomes in elderly patients who underwent CRS and PIC. This is a retrospective study of prospectively collected data of 611 consecutive patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis who underwent CRS and PIC by the same surgical team at St George Hospital in Sydney, Australia, between January 1996 and December 2013. Patients were divided into two groups; group 1 (<65 years old, n = 487) and group 2 (≥ 65 years old, n = 124). Subgroup analysis was performed in patients who were ≥75 years old (n = 20). A significant difference was defined as p < 0.05. There was no significant statistical difference in terms of mean total hospital stay, intensive care unit stay, high dependency unit stay and complication rates. Postoperative mortality was 2 and 3 % in groups 1 and 2, respectively. Overall survival did not reach a statistical significance between the two groups. In subgroup analysis, patients showed similar morbidity results to patients who were <65 years old. CRS and PIC can be safely done in the elderly. Age alone should not be the single exclusion criterion but rather taken into consideration along with other factors to determine the suitability of elderly patients.

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 > Ph. D. Student 4 17%
Researcher 3 13%
Lecturer 2 8%
Student > Bachelor 2 8%
Student > Master 2 8%
Other 5 21%
Unknown 6 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 50%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 4%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 4%
Social Sciences 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 7 29%
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 28 August 2015.
All research outputs
#20,656,161
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from World Journal of Surgical Oncology
#1,099
of 2,145 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#205,336
of 279,604 outputs
Outputs of similar age from World Journal of Surgical Oncology
#29
of 62 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,145 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.3. 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 279,604 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 62 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.