↓ Skip to main content

Postpartum infective endocarditis with Enterococcus faecalis in Japan: a case report

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Medical Case Reports, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (53rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
47 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
Postpartum infective endocarditis with Enterococcus faecalis in Japan: a case report
Published in
Journal of Medical Case Reports, November 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13256-017-1494-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Miku Tamura, Mitsutaka Shoji, Ken Fujita, Shohei Nakamura, Yurika Takahashi, Yurika Suzuki, Mika Asakura, Shun Kimizuka, Makiko Sasaki, Katsuya Sugawara

Abstract

The clinical characteristics of infective endocarditis include the presence of predisposing cardiac disease, a history of illegal drug use, and high morbidity in the elderly. Only a few cases of the disease after delivery have been reported in the literature. We describe here a first case of enterococcal postpartum infective endocarditis without underlying disease in Japan. We report the case of a 31-year-old Japanese woman with postpartum infective endocarditis by Enterococcus faecalis. She had no significant medical history or any unusual social history. After emergency surgery for severe mitral regurgitation and antimicrobial treatment for 6 weeks, she was discharged from our hospital and is now being monitored at an out-patient clinic. We encountered a case of Enterococcus faecalis infective endocarditis that occurred in the native valve of a postpartum healthy woman. Although the pathogenesis of this case remains unclear, it could be due to bacteremia arising from the administration of prophylactic broad-spectrum antibiotics used for cesarean section. Previous use of cefotiam and urinary catheter insertion may be risk factors for nosocomial enterococcal bacteremia in this case.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 47 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 9 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 13%
Other 4 9%
Researcher 4 9%
Student > Master 4 9%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 17 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 26%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 15%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 2%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 20 43%
Attention Score in Context

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 21 March 2018.
All research outputs
#15,483,707
of 23,008,860 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Medical Case Reports
#1,516
of 3,947 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#260,116
of 431,651 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Medical Case Reports
#27
of 73 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,008,860 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,947 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. 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 431,651 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 73 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.