↓ Skip to main content

Chylothorax following endovascular aortic repair with subclavian revascularization - a case report

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery, November 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
22 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
Chylothorax following endovascular aortic repair with subclavian revascularization - a case report
Published in
Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery, November 2014
DOI 10.1186/s13019-014-0165-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yuan-Jang Hsu, Pin-Ru Chen, Yu-Sen Lin, Hsin-Yuan Fang, Chien-Kuang Chen

Abstract

BackgroundThoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is becoming increasingly popular due to reduced perioperative morbidity and mortality compared with open surgical repair. However, complications can occur when the left subclavian artery is involved. When performing TEVAR with left carotid-subclavian artery bypass the stent graft will extend to the left common carotid artery. We herein present the case of a patient with a type B aortic dissection with an acute intramural hematoma. Chylothorax was noted after TEVAR with left carotid-subclavian artery bypass.Case reportA 66-year-old female with descending aortic dissection that was treated conservatively developed the sudden onset of back pain. Aortic computed tomography (CT) showed a type B intramural aortic dissection. TEVAR with left carotid-subclavian artery bypass was performed. Left chylothorax was noted after surgery with drainage of up to 1000 mL per day. Conservative management was ineffective. Thoracoscopic ligation of the thoracic duct was performed with resolution of the chyle leakage.ConclusionChylothorax can occur after TEVAR with carotid-subclavian artery bypass and likely results from thoracic duct injury. When conservative treatments fail, ligation of the thoracic duct cephalad to aortic hiatus can resolve the chyle leakage.

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 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 5%
United States 1 5%
Unknown 20 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 32%
Other 3 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 9%
Researcher 2 9%
Other 2 9%
Unknown 3 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 68%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 5%
Psychology 1 5%
Engineering 1 5%
Unknown 4 18%

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 02 November 2014.
All research outputs
#3,440,038
of 4,453,342 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery
#115
of 222 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#92,455
of 123,848 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery
#6
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 4,453,342 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 222 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.6. 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 123,848 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 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.