| Title |
Submucosal injection solution for gastrointestinal tract endoscopic mucosal resection and endoscopic submucosal dissection
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Drug Design, Development and Therapy, August 2008
|
| DOI | 10.2147/dddt.s3219 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Toshio Uraoka, Yutaka Saito, Kazuhide Yamamoto, Takahiro Fujii |
| Abstract |
Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) have provided new alternatives for minimally invasive treatment of gastrointestinal adenomas and early-stage cancers that involve a minimum risk of lymph-node metastasis. The use of submucosal injections is essential to the success of these endoscopic resection techniques. The "ideal" submucosal injection solution should provide a sufficiently high submucosal fluid cushion for safe and effective EMRs and ESDs while also preserving lesion tissue for accurate histopathological assessment. In the past, normal saline (NS) solution was commonly used for this purpose, but it is difficult to achieve the proper submucosal elevation and maintain the desired height with NS. Therefore, other safe and effective facilitative submucosal injection solutions have been developed that also take into account relevant cost-benefit considerations. This review examines recent advances in the development of effective submucosal injection solutions for use during endoscopic resections. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | 2% |
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 56 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 21 | 36% |
| Other | 5 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 9 | 16% |
| Unknown | 10 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 32 | 55% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 6 | 10% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 5% |
| Materials Science | 2 | 3% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 5% |
| Unknown | 11 | 19% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 25 July 2023.
All research outputs
#3,816,021
of 25,460,914 outputs
Outputs from Drug Design, Development and Therapy
#250
of 2,272 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,008
of 98,117 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Drug Design, Development and Therapy
#1
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,460,914 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,272 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 98,117 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them