↓ Skip to main content

Rapid ascending aorta stiffening in bicuspid aortic valve on serial cardiovascular magnetic resonance evaluation: comparison with connective tissue disorders

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging, February 2021
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
9 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
Rapid ascending aorta stiffening in bicuspid aortic valve on serial cardiovascular magnetic resonance evaluation: comparison with connective tissue disorders
Published in
Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging, February 2021
DOI 10.1186/s12968-021-00716-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alejandro Perez-Casares, Audrey Dionne, Kimberlee Gauvreau, Ashwin Prakash

Abstract

Aortic stiffness has been shown to be abnormal in patients with bicuspid aortic valve (BAV), and is considered a component of the aortopathy associated with this condition. Progressive aortic stiffening associated with aging has been previously described in normal adults. However, it is not known if aging related aortic stiffening occurs at the same rate in BAV patients. We determined the longitudinal rate of decline in segmental distensibility in BAV patients using serial cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) studies, and compared to previously published results from a group of patients with connective tissue disorders (CTD). A retrospective review of CMR and clinical data on children and adults with BAV (n = 49, 73% male; 23 ± 11 years) with at least two CMRs (total 98 examinations) over a median follow-up of 4.1 years (range 1-9 years) was performed to measure aortic distensibility at the ascending (AAo) and descending aorta (DAo). Longitudinal changes in aortic stiffness were assessed using linear mixed-effects modeling. The comparison group of CTD patients had a similar age and gender profile (n = 50, 64% male; 20.6 ± 12 years). Compared to CTD patients, BAV patients had a more distensible AAo early in life but showed a steeper decline in distensibility on serial examinations [mean 10-year decline in AAo distensibility (× 10-3 mmHg-1) 2.4 in BAV vs 1.3 in CTD, p = 0.005]. In contrast, the DAo was more distensible in BAV patients throughout the age spectrum, and DAo distensibility declined with aging at a rate similar to CTD patients [mean 10 year decline in DAo distensibility (× 10-3 mmHg-1) 0.3 in BAV vs 0.4 in CTD, p = 0.58]. On serial CMR measurements, AAo distensibility declined at significantly steeper rate in BAV patients compared to a comparison group with CTDs, while DAo distensibility declined at similar rates in both groups. These findings offer new mechanistic insights into the differing pathogenesis of the aortopathy seen in BAV and CTD patients.

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 9 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 9 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 2 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 22%
Lecturer 1 11%
Researcher 1 11%
Student > Postgraduate 1 11%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 2 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 2 22%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 22%
Computer Science 1 11%
Psychology 1 11%
Unknown 3 33%
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 13 March 2021.
All research outputs
#16,282,309
of 25,711,518 outputs
Outputs from Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging
#1,006
of 1,386 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#254,907
of 453,873 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging
#23
of 41 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,711,518 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,386 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% 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 453,873 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 41 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.