| Title |
Emergency laparoscopic ileo-colic resection and primary intracorporeal anastomosis for Crohn’s acute ileitis with free perforation and faecal peritonitis: first ever reported laparoscopic treatment
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
SpringerPlus, January 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40064-015-1619-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
A. Birindelli, G. Tugnoli, D. Beghelli, A. Siciliani, A. Biscardi, C. Bertarelli, S. Selleri, R. Lombardi, S. Di Saverio |
| Abstract |
Laparoscopy for abdominal surgical emergencies is gaining increasing acceptance given the spreading of advanced laparoscopic skills among modern surgeons, as it may allow at the same time an accurate diagnosis and appropriate treatment of acute abdomen. The use of the laparoscopic approach also in case of diffuse peritonitis is now becoming accepted provided hemodynamic stability, despite the common belief in the past decades that such severe condition represented an indication for conversion to open surgery or an immediate contraindication to continue laparoscopy. Crohn's Disease (CD) is a rare cause of acute abdomen and peritonitis, only a few cases of CD acute perforations are reported in the published literature; these cases have always been approached and treated by open laparotomy. We report on a case of a faecal peritonitis due to an acute perforation caused by a terminal ileitis in an undiagnosed CD. The patient underwent diagnostic laparoscopy followed by a laparoscopic ileo-colic resection and primary intracorporeal anastomosis, with a successful postoperative outcome. Complicated CD has to be considered within the possible causes of small bowel non-traumatic perforation. Emergency laparoscopy with resection and primary intra-corporeal anastomosis can be feasible and may be a safe and effective minimally invasive alternative to open surgery even in case of faecal peritonitis, in selected stable patients and in presence of appropriate laparoscopic colorectal surgical skills and experience. To the best of our knowledge the present experience is the first ever reported case managed with a totally laparoscopic extended ileocecal resection with intracorporeal anastomosis in case of acutely perforated CD and diffuse peritonitis. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Italy | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 4 | 17% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 8% |
| Professor | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 5 | 21% |
| Unknown | 5 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 46% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 10 | 42% |
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 11 April 2016.
All research outputs
#17,780,575
of 22,837,982 outputs
Outputs from SpringerPlus
#1,201
of 1,849 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#267,482
of 393,663 outputs
Outputs of similar age from SpringerPlus
#82
of 184 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,837,982 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,849 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 393,663 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 184 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.