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 |
Aortic valve replacement in elderly with small aortic root and low body surface area; the Perceval S valve and its impact in effective orifice area
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery, April 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13019-016-0438-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Panagiotis Dedeilias, Nikolaos G. Baikoussis, Efstathia Prappa, Dimitrios Asvestas, Michalis Argiriou, Christos Charitos |
| Abstract |
The aim of this study is to see how the sutureless, stentless, Perceval S aortic valves behave when implanted in elderly patients with small aortic root and the comparison with a second group of patients with similar characteristics where a conventional stented bioprosthesis was implanted. This is a prospective randomized institutional study. Our material is composed from 25 patients who underwent aortic valve replacement with sutureless self-anchoring Perceval S valve implantation (LivaNova), compared with 25 patients with conventional stented biological prosthesis implanted (soprano LivaNova group). The two groups of patients have similar demographic and medical characteristics with severe aortic stenosis. The study was conducted from January 2012 to June 2014. Preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative parameters were studied in order to investigate the utility of the Perceval S valves in this group of patients. The Perceval S valve implantation seems to be an interesting biological valve with good hemodynamic characteristics as compared with the typical biological prosthesis providing shorter ischemia time (40 ± 5.50 min vs 86 ± 15.86 min; p < 0.001), shorter extracorporeal circulation time (73.75 ± 8.12 min vs 120.36 ± 28.31 min p < 0.001), less operation time (149.38 ± 15.22 min vs 206.64 ± 42.85 min; p < 0.001) and better postoperative recovery. The postoperative gradients were 23.5 ± 19.20 mmHg vs 24.5 ± 19.90 mmHg respectively. The postoperative effective orifice area in these two groups were respectively 1.5 =/-0.19 cm(2) vs 1.1=/-0.5 cm(2) (p 0.002). Among the 25 patients of the Soprano stented valve, 3 (12 %) came back in 6 months with New York Heart Association (NYHA) 3. The PPM of these patients was the cause of readmission in the Hospital required diuresis and supplementary treatment. Aortic valve replacement with Perceval aortic valves in geriatric patients with comorbidities and small aortic annulus seems to be an alternative, safe and "fast" intervention with excellent short and mid-term results which provides a better effective orifice area. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Belgium | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 55 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 9 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 16% |
| Researcher | 5 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 7% |
| Professor | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 8 | 14% |
| Unknown | 18 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 34 | 61% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 2% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 1 | 2% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 2% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 18 | 32% |
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 07 May 2016.
All research outputs
#15,372,369
of 22,869,263 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery
#392
of 1,234 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#180,681
of 300,961 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery
#6
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,869,263 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 1,234 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.2. 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 300,961 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 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.