↓ Skip to main content

TOE imaging of a large aortic mass: an unusual cause of systemic embolization in a septic patient

Overview of attention for article published in Echo Research & Practice, March 2017
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 (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
22 X users

Readers on

mendeley
1 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
TOE imaging of a large aortic mass: an unusual cause of systemic embolization in a septic patient
Published in
Echo Research & Practice, March 2017
DOI 10.1530/erp-17-0006
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sarah R. Blake, Jamal Khan, Adrian Chenzbraun

Abstract

A 72-year-old woman presented with sepsis and lower limb ischaemia. Transoesophageal echocardiography (TOE) for suspected endocarditis revealed no cardiac pathology or source of emboli but a large thrombus-like mass was noted in a normal size descending aorta (Fig. 1A, Video 1). Repeat TOE after two weeks of anticoagulation showed two new masses and no change in the size of the original one (Fig. 1B). The patient died following bilateral leg amputation. There was no PM to provide pathology confirmation but the most likely diagnosis was of a thrombus, possibly infected. Large aortic clots in a mildly diseased aorta are unusual and a rare cause of systemic embolization1. TOE is considered the best imaging technique for aortic thrombi2 and in this case it clarified the correct diagnosis. A systematic TOE protocol3 with assessment of all structures including descending aorta should be followed irrespective of the original indication. In the present case a more focussed study might have missed the main pathology which was captured due to the thoroughness of the operator in completing the scan including all aortic views.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 22 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 1 Mendeley reader of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 1 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 1 100%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 1 100%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 06 October 2017.
All research outputs
#2,627,432
of 25,630,321 outputs
Outputs from Echo Research & Practice
#69
of 272 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#47,385
of 323,325 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Echo Research & Practice
#6
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,630,321 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 272 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 gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 323,325 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 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.