↓ Skip to main content

Synthetic hematocrit derived from the longitudinal relaxation of blood can lead to clinically significant errors in measurement of extracellular volume fraction in pediatric and young adult patients

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
45 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Synthetic hematocrit derived from the longitudinal relaxation of blood can lead to clinically significant errors in measurement of extracellular volume fraction in pediatric and young adult patients
Published in
Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging, August 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12968-017-0377-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Frank J. Raucci, David A. Parra, Jason T. Christensen, Lazaro E. Hernandez, Larry W. Markham, Meng Xu, James C. Slaughter, Jonathan H. Soslow

Abstract

Extracellular volume fraction (ECV) is altered in pathological cardiac remodeling and predicts death and arrhythmia. ECV can be quantified using cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) T1 mapping but calculation requires a measured hematocrit (Hct). The longitudinal relaxation of blood has been used in adults to generate a synthetic Hct (estimate of true Hct) but has not been validated in pediatric populations. One hundred fourteen children and young adults underwent a total of 163 CMRs with T1 mapping. The majority of subjects had a measured Hct the same day (N = 146). Native and post-contrast T1 were determined in blood pool, septum, and free wall of mid-LV, avoiding areas of late gadolinium enhancement. Synthetic Hct and ECV were calculated and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and linear regression were used to compare measured and synthetic values. The mean age was 16.4 ± 6.4 years and mean left ventricular ejection fraction was 59% ± 9%. The mean measured Hct was 41.8 ± 3.0% compared to the mean synthetic Hct of 43.2% ± 2.9% (p < 0.001, ICC 0.46 [0.27, 0.52]) with the previously published model and 41.8% ± 1.4% (p < 0.001, ICC 0.28 [0.13, 0. 42]) with the locally-derived model. Mean measured mid-free wall ECV was 30.5% ± 4.8% and mean synthetic mid-free wall ECV of local model was 29.7% ± 4.6% (p < 0.001, ICC 0.93 [0.91, 0.95]). Correlations were not affected by heart rate and did not significantly differ in subpopulation analysis. While the ICC was strong, differences between measured and synthetic ECV ranged from -8.4% to 4.3% in the septum and -12.6% to 15.8% in the free wall. Using our laboratory's normal cut-off of 28.5%, 59 patients (37%) were miscategorized (53 false negatives, 6 false positives) with published model ECV. The local model had 37 miscategorizations (20 false negatives, 17 false positives), significantly fewer but still a substantial number (23%). Our data suggest that use of synthetic Hct for the calculation of ECV results in miscategorization of individual patients. This difference may be less significant once synthetic ECV is calculated and averaged over a large research cohort, making it potentially useful as a research tool. However, we recommend formal measurement of Hct in children and young adults for clinical CMRs.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 45 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 22%
Other 4 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Student > Bachelor 3 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 4%
Other 7 16%
Unknown 16 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 44%
Engineering 2 4%
Neuroscience 2 4%
Psychology 1 2%
Unspecified 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 17 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 16 August 2017.
All research outputs
#8,329,992
of 25,728,855 outputs
Outputs from Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging
#662
of 1,386 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#121,027
of 328,197 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging
#23
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,728,855 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,386 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% 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 328,197 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.