↓ Skip to main content

Giant coronary artery aneurysms in juvenile polyarteritis nodosa: a case report

Overview of attention for article published in Pediatric Rheumatology, January 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
31 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
Giant coronary artery aneurysms in juvenile polyarteritis nodosa: a case report
Published in
Pediatric Rheumatology, January 2012
DOI 10.1186/1546-0096-10-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Therese L Canares, Dawn M Wahezi, Kanwal M Farooqi, Robert H Pass, Norman T Ilowite

Abstract

Juvenile polyarteritis nodosa (PAN) is a rare, necrotizing vasculitis, primarily affecting small to medium-sized muscular arteries. Cardiac involvement amongst patients with PAN is uncommon and reports of coronary artery aneurysms in juvenile PAN are exceedingly rare. We describe a 16 year old girl who presented with fever, arthritis and two giant coronary artery aneurysms, initially diagnosed as atypical Kawasaki disease and treated with IVIG and methylprednisolone. Her persistent fevers, arthritis, myalgias were refractory to treatment, and onset of a vasculitic rash suggested an alternative diagnosis. Based on angiographic abnormalities, polymyalgia, hypertension and skin involvement, this patient met criteria for juvenile PAN. She was treated with six months of intravenous cyclophosphamide and high dose corticosteroids for presumed PAN related coronary vasculitis. Maintenance therapy was continued with azathioprine and the patient currently remains without evidence of active vasculitis. She remains on anticoagulation for persistence of the aneurysms. This case illustrates a rare and unusual presentation of giant coronary artery aneurysms in the setting of juvenile PAN.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 3%
Unknown 30 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 16%
Student > Master 5 16%
Student > Bachelor 3 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 10%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 9 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 61%
Unspecified 1 3%
Computer Science 1 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 3%
Unknown 9 29%
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 12 January 2012.
All research outputs
#18,303,566
of 22,661,413 outputs
Outputs from Pediatric Rheumatology
#553
of 690 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#195,188
of 243,401 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pediatric Rheumatology
#4
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,661,413 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 690 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% 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 243,401 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 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.