↓ Skip to main content

Obesity paradox in patients undergoing lung lobectomy – myth or reality?

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Surgery, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
21 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
Obesity paradox in patients undergoing lung lobectomy – myth or reality?
Published in
BMC Surgery, August 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12893-018-0395-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lubomír Tulinský, Marcel Mitták, Hana Tomášková, Petr Ostruszka, Igor Penka, Peter Ihnát

Abstract

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the impact of BMI on the short-term outcomes of patients undergoing lung lobectomy. This was a retrospective clinical cohort study conducted in a single institution to assess the short-term outcomes of obese patients undergoing lung resection. Intraoperative and postoperative parameters were compared between the two study subgroups: obese (BMI ≥30 kg/m2) and non-obese patients (BMI < 30 kg/m2). In total, 203 patients were enrolled in the study (70 obese and 133 non-obese patients). Both study subgroups were comparable with regards to demographics, clinical data and surgical approach (thoracoscopy vs. thoracotomy). The surgery time was significantly longer in obese patients (p = 0.048). There was no difference in the frequency of intraoperative complications between the study subgroups (p = 0.635). The postoperative hospital stay was similar in both study subgroups (p = 0.366). A 30-day postoperative morbidity was higher in a subgroup of non-obese patients (33.8% vs. 21.7%), but the difference was not significant (p = 0.249). In the subgroup of non-obese patients, a higher frequency of mild and severe postoperative complications was observed. However, the differences between the study subgroups were not statistically significant due to the borderline p-value (p = 0.053). The 30-day postoperative mortality was comparable between obese and non-obese patients (p = 0.167). Obesity does not increase the incidence and severity of intraoperative and postoperative complications after lung lobectomy. Slightly better outcomes in obese patients indicate that obesity paradox might be a reality in patients undergoing lung resection.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users 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 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 21 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 3 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 14%
Other 2 10%
Student > Bachelor 2 10%
Lecturer 1 5%
Other 2 10%
Unknown 8 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 38%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 10%
Computer Science 2 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 5%
Unknown 8 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 October 2018.
All research outputs
#15,017,219
of 23,100,534 outputs
Outputs from BMC Surgery
#326
of 1,340 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#199,666
of 333,251 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Surgery
#6
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,100,534 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,340 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its peers.
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 333,251 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.