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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Mitral valve surgery for mitral regurgitation caused by Libman-Sacks endocarditis: a report of four cases and a systematic review of the literature
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery, March 2010
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1749-8090-5-13 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Wobbe Bouma, Theo J Klinkenberg, Iwan CC van der Horst, Inez J Wijdh-den Hamer, Michiel E Erasmus, Marc Bijl, Albert JH Suurmeijer, Felix Zijlstra, Massimo A Mariani |
| Abstract |
Libman-Sacks endocarditis of the mitral valve was first described by Libman and Sacks in 1924. Currently, the sterile verrucous vegetative lesions seen in Libman-Sacks endocarditis are regarded as a cardiac manifestation of both systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and the antiphospholipid syndrome (APS). Although typically mild and asymptomatic, complications of Libman-Sacks endocarditis may include superimposed bacterial endocarditis, thromboembolic events, and severe valvular regurgitation and/or stenosis requiring surgery. In this study we report two cases of mitral valve repair and two cases of mitral valve replacement for mitral regurgitation (MR) caused by Libman-Sacks endocarditis. In addition, we provide a systematic review of the English literature on mitral valve surgery for MR caused by Libman-Sacks endocarditis. This report shows that mitral valve repair is feasible and effective in young patients with relatively stable SLE and/or APS and only localized mitral valve abnormalities caused by Libman-Sacks endocarditis. Both clinical and echocardiographic follow-up after repair show excellent mid- and long-term results. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Saudi Arabia | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 78 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 1% |
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 75 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 12 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 13% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 7 | 9% |
| Other | 6 | 8% |
| Other | 20 | 26% |
| Unknown | 13 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 55 | 71% |
| Psychology | 2 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 1% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 1% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 2 | 3% |
| Unknown | 16 | 21% |
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 12 July 2020.
All research outputs
#17,020,217
of 25,791,495 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery
#434
of 1,417 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#85,765
of 104,305 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery
#2
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,791,495 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,417 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% 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 104,305 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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.