↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Clinical management of achalasia: current state of the art

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical and Experimental Gastroenterology, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (53rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
37 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
83 Mendeley
Title
Clinical management of achalasia: current state of the art
Published in
Clinical and Experimental Gastroenterology, April 2016
DOI 10.2147/ceg.s84019
Pubmed ID
Authors

Joseph T Krill, Rishi D Naik, Michael F Vaezi

Abstract

Achalasia is a primary disorder of esophageal motility. It classically presents with dysphagia to both solids and liquids but may be accompanied by regurgitation and chest pain. The gold standard for the diagnosis of achalasia is esophageal motility testing with manometry, which often reveals aperistalsis of the esophageal body and incomplete lower esophageal sphincter relaxation. The diagnosis is aided by complimentary tests, such as esophagogastroduodenoscopy and contrast radiography. Esophagogastroduodenoscopy is indicated to rule out mimickers of the disease known as "pseudoachalasia" (eg, malignancy). Endoscopic appearance of a dilated esophagus with retained food or saliva and a puckered lower esophageal sphincter should raise suspicion for achalasia. Additionally, barium esophagography may reveal a dilated esophagus with a distal tapering giving it a "bird's beak" appearance. Multiple therapeutic modalities aid in the management of achalasia, the decision of which depends on operative risk factors. Conventional treatments include medical therapy, botulinum toxin injection, pneumatic dilation, and Heller myotomy. The last two are defined as the most definitive treatment options. New emerging therapies include peroral endoscopic myotomy, placement of self-expanding metallic stents, and endoscopic sclerotherapy.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 83 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 83 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 13 16%
Student > Postgraduate 11 13%
Other 10 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 12%
Student > Master 9 11%
Other 18 22%
Unknown 12 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 53 64%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 1%
Arts and Humanities 1 1%
Other 3 4%
Unknown 16 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 09 July 2019.
All research outputs
#12,951,096
of 22,860,626 outputs
Outputs from Clinical and Experimental Gastroenterology
#135
of 306 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#137,643
of 300,229 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical and Experimental Gastroenterology
#6
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,860,626 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 306 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 300,229 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.