↓ Skip to main content

Timing surgery in mitral regurgitation: defining risk and optimising intervention using stress echocardiography

Overview of attention for article published in Echo Research & Practice, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
30 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
37 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
Timing surgery in mitral regurgitation: defining risk and optimising intervention using stress echocardiography
Published in
Echo Research & Practice, December 2016
DOI 10.1530/erp-16-0019
Pubmed ID
Authors

Boyang Liu, Nicola C. Edwards, Simon Ray, Richard P. Steeds

Abstract

Mitral regurgitation (MR) is the second most common form of valvular disease requiring surgery. Correct identification of surgical candidates and optimising the timing of surgery is key in management. For primary MR, this relies upon a balance between the perioperative risks and rates of successful repair in patients undergoing early surgery when asymptomatic with the potential risk of irreversible left ventricular dysfunction if intervention is performed too late. For secondary MR, recognition that this is a highly dynamic condition where MR severity may change is key, although data on outcomes in determining whether concomitant valve intervention is performed with revascularisation has raised questions regarding timing of surgery. There has been substantial interest in the use of stress echocardiography to risk stratify patients in mitral regurgitation. This article reviews the role of stress echocardiography in both primary and secondary mitral regurgitation and discusses how this can help clinicians tackle the challenges of this prevalent condition.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 30 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 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 37 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 6 16%
Researcher 6 16%
Student > Bachelor 5 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 14%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 11%
Other 7 19%
Unknown 4 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 68%
Engineering 2 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 3%
Psychology 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 6 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 04 June 2018.
All research outputs
#1,954,010
of 25,377,790 outputs
Outputs from Echo Research & Practice
#54
of 268 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#37,684
of 416,468 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Echo Research & Practice
#2
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,377,790 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 268 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% 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 416,468 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 2 of them.