↓ Skip to main content

Infarct in a New Territory After Treatment Administration in the ESCAPE Randomized Controlled Trial (Endovascular Treatment for Small Core and Anterior Circulation Proximal Occlusion With Emphasis on…

Overview of attention for article published in Stroke, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (83rd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
13 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
51 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
76 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
Infarct in a New Territory After Treatment Administration in the ESCAPE Randomized Controlled Trial (Endovascular Treatment for Small Core and Anterior Circulation Proximal Occlusion With Emphasis on Minimizing CT to Recanalization Times)
Published in
Stroke, November 2016
DOI 10.1161/strokeaha.116.014852
Pubmed ID
Authors

Aravind Ganesh, Fahad S Al-Ajlan, Farahna Sabiq, Zarina Assis, Jeremy L Rempel, Kenneth Butcher, John Thornton, Peter Kelly, Daniel Roy, Alexandre Y Poppe, Tudor G Jovin, Thomas Devlin, Blaise W Baxter, Timo Krings, Leanne K Casaubon, Donald F Frei, Hana Choe, Donatella Tampieri, Jeanne Teitelbaum, Cheemun Lum, Jennifer Mandzia, Stephen J Phillips, Oh Young Bang, Mohammed A Almekhlafi, Shelagh B Coutts, Philip A Barber, Tolulope Sajobi, Andrew M Demchuk, Muneer Eesa, Michael D Hill, Mayank Goyal, Bijoy K Menon

Abstract

Infarct in a new previously unaffected territory (INT) is a potential complication of endovascular treatment. We applied a recently proposed methodology to identify and classify INTs in the ESCAPE randomized controlled trial (Endovascular Treatment for Small Core and Anterior Circulation Proximal Occlusion With Emphasis on Minimizing CT to Recanalization Times). The core laboratory identified INTs on 24-hour follow-up imaging, blinded to treatment allocation, after assessing all baseline imaging. INTs were classified into 3 types (I-III) and 2 subtypes (A/B) based on size and if catheter manipulation was likely performed across the vessel territory ostium. Logistic regression was used to understand the effect of multiple a priori identified variables on INT occurrence. Ordinal logistic regression was used to analyze the effect of INTs on modified Rankin Scale shift at 90 days. From 308 patients included, 14 INTs (4.5% overall; 2.8% on follow-up noncontrast computed tomography, 11.7% on follow-up magnetic resonance imaging) were identified (5.0% in endovascular treatment arm versus 4.0% in control arm [P=0.7]). The use of intravenous alteplase was associated with a 68% reduction in the odds of INT occurrence (3.0% with versus 9.1% without; odds ratio, 0.32; 95% confidence interval, 0.11-0.96; adjusted for age, sex, and treatment type). No other variables were associated with INTs. INT occurrence was associated with reduced probability of good clinical outcome (common odds ratio, 0.25; 95% confidence interval, 0.09-0.74; adjusted for age, type of treatment, and follow-up scan). INTs are uncommon, detected more frequently on follow-up magnetic resonance imaging, and affect clinical outcome. In experienced centers, endovascular treatment is likely not causal, whereas intravenous alteplase may be therapeutic. URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01778335.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 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 76 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 76 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 14%
Other 9 12%
Student > Master 9 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 8%
Student > Bachelor 6 8%
Other 18 24%
Unknown 17 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 30 39%
Neuroscience 9 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 7%
Unspecified 2 3%
Psychology 2 3%
Other 9 12%
Unknown 19 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 26 April 2019.
All research outputs
#3,269,610
of 25,377,790 outputs
Outputs from Stroke
#3,360
of 12,372 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#52,727
of 318,857 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Stroke
#61
of 138 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,377,790 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,372 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 318,857 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 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 138 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 55% of its contemporaries.