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 |
Comparison of the myocardial protective effect of sevoflurane versus propofol in patients undergoing heart valve replacement surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Anesthesiology, March 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12871-017-0326-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Xiao-Lin Yang, Dan Wang, Guo-Yuan Zhang, Xiao-Lan Guo |
| Abstract |
This study aimed to compare myocardial protective effects of anaesthesia with intravenous infusion of propofol versus inhalation of sevoflurane in patients undergoing heart valve replacement surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass. Seventy-six patients undergoing valve replacement with cardiopulmonary bypass were randomly assigned to propofol or sevoflurane anesthesia during the surgery, respectively. For assessing myocardial injury, cardiac troponin I (cTnI) and creatine kinase isozyme (CK-MB) were determined before induction (T0), 0.5 h (T1) and 3 h (T2) after aortic unclamping, and 24 h (T3) and 48 h (T4) after surgery. The concentrations of interleukin (IL)-6 and IL-10 as the systemic inflammatory and anti-inflammatory markers were also measured at above time points. In the sevoflurane group, the plasma concentrations of cTnI and CK-MB from Tl to T4 and the levels of IL-6 and IL-10 from T1 to T2 were lower than those in the propofol group. Moreover, a higher ratio of automatic heart beat recovery and a shorter length of intensive care unit or hospital stay were found in the sevoflurane group comparing with the propofol group. Sevoflurane anaesthesia produced more prominent myocardial protection and attenuated inflammatory response than propofol anaesthesia in patients with valve replacement surgery under cardiopulmonary bypass, resulting in shorter ICU and in-hospital stay. Identified as ChiCTR-IOR-16009979 at http://www.chictr.org.cn/ . |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 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 64 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 64 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 8 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 13% |
| Other | 6 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 14 | 22% |
| Unknown | 19 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 25 | 39% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 6% |
| Engineering | 2 | 3% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 4 | 6% |
| Unknown | 26 | 41% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 08 March 2017.
All research outputs
#20,408,464
of 22,958,253 outputs
Outputs from BMC Anesthesiology
#1,185
of 1,504 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#270,573
of 310,371 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Anesthesiology
#35
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,958,253 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,504 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 310,371 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.