↓ Skip to main content

Comparison of global myocardial strain assessed by cardiovascular magnetic resonance tagging and feature tracking to infarct size at predicting remodelling following STEMI

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Cardiovascular Disorders, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
39 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
Comparison of global myocardial strain assessed by cardiovascular magnetic resonance tagging and feature tracking to infarct size at predicting remodelling following STEMI
Published in
BMC Cardiovascular Disorders, January 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12872-016-0461-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Abhishek M. Shetye, Sheraz A. Nazir, Naveed A. Razvi, Nathan Price, Jamal N. Khan, Florence Y. Lai, Iain B. Squire, Gerald P. McCann, Jayanth R. Arnold

Abstract

To determine if global strain parameters measured by cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) acutely following ST-segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction (STEMI) predict adverse left ventricular (LV) remodelling independent of infarct size (IS). Sixty-five patients with acute STEMI (mean age 60 ± 11 years) underwent CMR at 1-3 days post-reperfusion (baseline) and at 4 months. Global peak systolic circumferential strain (GCS), measured by tagging and Feature Tracking (FT), and global peak systolic longitudinal strain (GLS), measured by FT, were calculated at baseline, along with IS. On follow up scans, volumetric analysis was performed to determine the development of adverse remodelling - a composite score based on development of either end-diastolic volume index [EDVI] ≥20% or end-systolic volume index [ESVI] ≥15% at follow-up compared to baseline. The magnitude of GCS was higher when measured using FT (-21.1 ± 6.3%) than with tagging (-12.1 ± 4.3; p < 0.001 for difference). There was good correlation of strain with baseline LVEF (r 0.64-to 0.71) and IS (ρ -0.62 to-0.72). Baseline strain parameters were unable to predict development of adverse LV remodelling. Only baseline IS predicted adverse remodelling - Odds Ratio 1.05 (95% CI 1.01-1.10, p = 0.03), area under the ROC curve 0.70 (95% CI 0.52-0.87, p = 0.04). Baseline global strain by CMR does not predict the development of adverse LV remodelling following STEMI.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 39 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 7 18%
Researcher 5 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 8%
Student > Bachelor 3 8%
Other 7 18%
Unknown 10 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 24 62%
Engineering 2 5%
Unspecified 1 3%
Unknown 12 31%

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 10 March 2017.
All research outputs
#7,955,094
of 9,176,636 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cardiovascular Disorders
#592
of 682 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#214,450
of 253,541 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cardiovascular Disorders
#17
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 9,176,636 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 682 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.5. 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 253,541 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 18 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.