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 |
Quantitative cardiovascular magnetic resonance perfusion imaging identifies reduced flow reserve in microvascular coronary artery disease
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging, February 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12968-018-0435-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Benjamin Zorach, Peter W. Shaw, Jamieson Bourque, Sujith Kuruvilla, Pelbreton C. Balfour, Yang Yang, Roshin Mathew, Jonathan Pan, Jorge A. Gonzalez, Angela M. Taylor, Craig H. Meyer, Frederick H. Epstein, Christopher M. Kramer, Michael Salerno |
| Abstract |
Preliminary semi-quantitative cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) perfusion studies have demonstrated reduced myocardial perfusion reserve (MPR) in patients with angina and risk factors for microvascular disease (MVD), however fully quantitative CMR has not been studied. The purpose of this study is to evaluate whether fully quantitative CMR identifies reduced MPR in this population, and to investigate the relationship between epicardial atherosclerosis, left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH), extracellular volume (ECV), and perfusion. Forty-six patients with typical angina and risk factors for MVD (females, or males with diabetes or metabolic syndrome) who had no obstructive coronary artery disease by coronary angiography and 20 healthy control subjects underwent regadenoson stress CMR perfusion imaging using a dual-sequence quantitative spiral pulse sequence to quantify MPR. Subjects also underwent T1 mapping to quantify ECV, and computed tomographic (CT) coronary calcium scoring to assess atherosclerosis burden. In patients with risk factors for MVD, both MPR (2.21 [1.95,2.69] vs. 2.93 [2.763.19], p < 0.001) and stress myocardial perfusion (2.65 ± 0.62 ml/min/g, vs. 3.17 ± 0.49 ml/min/g p < 0.002) were reduced as compared to controls. These differences remained after adjusting for age, left ventricular (LV) mass, body mass index (BMI), and gender. There were no differences in native T1 or ECV between subjects and controls. Stress myocardial perfusion and MPR as measured by fully quantitative CMR perfusion imaging are reduced in subjects with risk factors for MVD with no obstructive CAD as compared to healthy controls. Neither myocardial hypertrophy nor fibrosis accounts for these differences. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 24 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 6 | 25% |
| Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | 2 | 8% |
| Portugal | 1 | 4% |
| Argentina | 1 | 4% |
| Mexico | 1 | 4% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 4% |
| Canada | 1 | 4% |
| Spain | 1 | 4% |
| Russia | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 9 | 38% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 16 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 13% |
| Scientists | 3 | 13% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 8% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 68 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 68 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 15% |
| Researcher | 8 | 12% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 7% |
| Other | 10 | 15% |
| Unknown | 18 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 29 | 43% |
| Engineering | 4 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 3% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 3% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 5 | 7% |
| Unknown | 24 | 35% |
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 15 March 2019.
All research outputs
#2,670,790
of 25,523,622 outputs
Outputs from Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging
#130
of 1,379 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#54,702
of 344,587 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging
#6
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,523,622 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 1,379 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 done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 344,587 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 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 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 71% of its contemporaries.