| Title |
Prognostic value of left ventricular dyssynchrony evaluated by gated myocardial perfusion imaging in patients with chronic kidney disease and normal perfusion defect scores
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Nuclear Cardiology, April 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12350-017-0889-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Hiroaki Mori, Satoshi Isobe, Susumu Suzuki, Kazumasa Unno, Ryota Morimoto, Naoaki Kano, Takahiro Okumura, Yoshinari Yasuda, Katsuhiko Kato, Toyoaki Murohara |
| Abstract |
This study aimed to investigate whether indices of left ventricular (LV) dyssynchrony by gated myocardial perfusion SPECT (GMPS) could be useful to predict prognosis in chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients with normal perfusion defect scores. One hundred and sixty-seven CKD patients with normal perfusion defect scores on adenosine-stress (201)Tl GMPS and no previous history of overt heart diseases were enrolled. Phase standard deviation (PSD) and bandwidth (BW) were automatically calculated from GMPS. The major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) for a mean of 560 days were defined as sudden cardiac death, fatal arrhythmias, and acute coronary syndrome requiring urgent coronary revascularization. Patients were divided into two groups according to the presence or absence of MACEs. The MACEs occurred in 12 patients (7.1%). Patients who experienced MACEs showed significantly higher PSD and wider BW than those who did not. In the Kaplan-Meier event-free survival analysis, cardiac event rate was significantly higher in the high-PSD and wide-BW group (n = 81) than in the low-PSD and narrow-BW group (n = 71) (P = .002). The multivariate regression analysis revealed that the PSD was associated with MACEs (odds ratio 1.33, 95% confidence interval 1.05-1.69, P = .01). The LV dyssynchrony indices from GMPS may be novel prognostic predictors in CKD patients with normal perfusion defect scores. |
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 | 3 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 15 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 20% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 20% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 13% |
| Professor | 1 | 7% |
| Librarian | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 2 | 13% |
| Unknown | 3 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 53% |
| Chemistry | 1 | 7% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 5 | 33% |
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 23 April 2017.
All research outputs
#19,962,154
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Nuclear Cardiology
#1,486
of 2,045 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#233,644
of 323,357 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Nuclear Cardiology
#31
of 49 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,045 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% 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 323,357 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 49 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.