| Title |
Association of B-type natriuretic peptide with coronary plaque subtypes detected by coronary computed tomography angiography in patients with stable chest pain
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging, April 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10554-017-1132-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yuhai Yang, Caiqin Li, Lei Zhao |
| Abstract |
Increased B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) level has been suggested to improve clinical predictions of coronary events and all-cause mortality. We aimed to analyze the relationship between BNP levels and coronary plaque subtypes as detected by coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA). 402 subjects undergoing CCTA were enrolled. The relationship between increased levels of BNP and plaque subtypes was tested using multivariable linear and logistic regression analysis. Plaques were categorized into subtypes of calcified, mixed and non-calcified. Coronary plaque was observed in 93 of 402 individuals. The participants were divided into three groups according to their serum BNP levels. Compared to those with low BNP level, subgroup with high BNP level had increased prevalence of all plaque types and mixed calcified arterial plaque (MCAP). Multivariable logistic regression analysis suggested increased BNP level predicted the MCAP. Multivariable logistic regression analysis between the presence of ≥2 plaques and BNP indicated that, subgroup with high BNP level was more likely to have MCAP than low BNP level. Our study suggests that increased BNP level is associated with MCAP detected by CCTA. Increased BNP level provides additional information about coronary artery disease in patients with stable chest pain detected by CCTA. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 | 2 | 67% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 33% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 9 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 9 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 33% |
| Professor | 1 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 11% |
| Other | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 3 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 22% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 11% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 5 | 56% |
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 17 April 2017.
All research outputs
#17,289,387
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging
#938
of 2,012 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#207,201
of 324,855 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging
#19
of 57 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,012 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.3. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% 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 324,855 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 57 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 57% of its contemporaries.