↓ Skip to main content

Practical issues in clinical scenarios involving CKD patients requiring antithrombotic therapy in light of the 2017 ESC guideline recommendations

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medicine, September 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
63 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
Practical issues in clinical scenarios involving CKD patients requiring antithrombotic therapy in light of the 2017 ESC guideline recommendations
Published in
BMC Medicine, September 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12916-018-1145-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Adrian Covic, Simonetta Genovesi, Patrick Rossignol, Philip A. Kalra, Alberto Ortiz, Maciej Banach, Alexandru Burlacu

Abstract

The choice of the most appropriate antithrombotic regimen that balances ischemic and bleeding risks was addressed by the August 2017 European Society of Cardiologists (ESC)/European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery Focused Update recommendations, which propose new evaluation scores and protocols for patients requiring a coronary stent or patients with an acute coronary syndrome, atrial fibrillation, or a high bleeding risk and indication for oral anticoagulation therapy. Numerous questions remain regarding antithrombotic regimens and risk management algorithms for both ischemic and hemorrhagic events in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) in various clinical scenarios. Limitations of current studies include a general ack of advanced CKD patients in major randomized controlled trials, of evidence on algorithm implementation, and of robust assessment tools for hemorrhagic risk. Herein, we aim to analyze the ESC Update recommendations and the newly implemented risk scores (DAPT, PRECISE-DAPT, PARIS) from the point of view of CKD, providing suggestions on drug choice (which combination has the best evidence), dosage, and duration (the same or different as for non-CKD population) of antithrombotics, as well as to identify current shortcomings and to envision directions of future research. We provide an evidence-based perspective on the new proposed bleeding management protocol, with focus on the CKD population. Despite previous important steps on antithrombotic therapy of renal patients, there remain many unsolved questions for which our suggestions could fundament new randomized controlled trials and specific protocols.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 63 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 11%
Student > Bachelor 7 11%
Student > Master 6 10%
Student > Postgraduate 6 10%
Other 5 8%
Other 12 19%
Unknown 20 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 35%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 5%
Psychology 3 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 2%
Other 4 6%
Unknown 26 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 07 December 2018.
All research outputs
#6,654,916
of 23,929,753 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#2,518
of 3,618 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#115,634
of 344,832 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#58
of 75 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,929,753 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,618 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 44.6. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% 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 344,832 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 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 75 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.