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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Differential flow improvements after valve replacements in bicuspid aortic valve disease: a cardiovascular magnetic resonance assessment
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging, February 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12968-018-0431-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Malenka M. Bissell, Margaret Loudon, Aaron T. Hess, Victoria Stoll, Elizabeth Orchard, Stefan Neubauer, Saul G. Myerson |
| Abstract |
Abnormal aortic flow patterns in bicuspid aortic valve disease (BAV) may be partly responsible for the associated aortic dilation. Aortic valve replacement (AVR) may normalize flow patterns and potentially slow the concomitant aortic dilation. We therefore sought to examine differences in flow patterns post AVR. Ninety participants underwent 4D flow cardiovascular magnetic resonance: 30 BAV patients with prior AVR (11 mechanical, 10 bioprosthetic, 9 Ross procedure), 30 BAV patients with a native aortic valve and 30 healthy subjects. The majority of subjects with mechanical AVR or Ross showed normal flow pattern (73% and 67% respectively) with near normal rotational flow values (7.2 ± 3.9 and 10.6 ± 10.5 mm2/ms respectively vs 3.8 ± 3.1 mm2/s for healthy subjects; both p > 0.05); and reduced in-plane wall shear stress (0.19 ± 0.13 N/m2 for mechanical AVR vs. 0.40 ± 0.28 N/m2 for native BAV, p < 0.05). In contrast, all subjects with a bioprosthetic AVR had abnormal flow patterns (mainly marked right-handed helical flow), with comparable rotational flow values to native BAV (20.7 ± 8.8 mm2/ms and 26.6 ± 16.6 mm2/ms respectively, p > 0.05), and a similar pattern for wall shear stress. Data before and after AVR (n = 16) supported these findings: mechanical AVR showed a significant reduction in rotational flow (30.4 ± 16.3 → 7.3 ± 4.1 mm2/ms; p < 0.05) and in-plane wall shear stress (0.47 ± 0.20 → 0.20 ± 0.13 N/m2; p < 0.05), whereas these parameters remained similar in the bioprosthetic AVR group. Abnormal flow patterns in BAV disease tend to normalize after mechanical AVR or Ross procedure, in contrast to the remnant abnormal flow pattern after bioprosthetic AVR. This may in part explain different aortic growth rates post AVR in BAV observed in the literature, but requires confirmation in a prospective study. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Italy | 2 | 25% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 25% |
| Australia | 1 | 13% |
| Chile | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 2 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 25% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 13% |
| Scientists | 1 | 13% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 59 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 10 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 14% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 10 | 17% |
| Unknown | 14 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 21 | 36% |
| Engineering | 10 | 17% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 3% |
| Sports and Recreations | 1 | 2% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 2 | 3% |
| Unknown | 22 | 37% |
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 24 February 2018.
All research outputs
#7,850,159
of 25,728,855 outputs
Outputs from Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging
#597
of 1,386 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#146,581
of 450,076 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging
#19
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 69th 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 56% 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 450,076 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 67% 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 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.