| Title |
2D longitudinal LV speckle tracking strain pattern in breast cancer survivors: sports activity vs exercise as prescription model
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Internal and Emergency Medicine, September 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11739-017-1741-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Giorgio Galanti, Gianni Pedrizzetti, Stefano Pedri, Laura Stefani |
| Abstract |
Prevention strategies are important to optimize and to manage heart care in breast cancer survivors. Regular physical activity at moderate intensity is normally proposed to maintain myocardial performance; however, no data is available about the different impact of different levels of physical exercise. 2D speckle tracking echocardiography (2DSTE) is an accepted method for early detection of myocardial dysfunction. The study aims to monitor the cardiac performances in breast cancer survivors by 2DSTE analysis to manage sports activity vs physical activity. Two groups of previous breast cancer survivors (33 BCS) trained at moderate intensity and 55 athletes practicing dragon boat (DBA) sport were enrolled. They were matched with two healthy subjects groups: 23 competitive female athletes practicing different sports and 20 healthy women trained with exercise as prescription model. All women were studied by a complete echo examination including LV global longitudinal strain (GLS) assessment (XStrain-Esaote). EF and GS are only significantly higher in healthy subjects (-25.4 ± 2.1). Nevertheless, GLS values are within the normal range for all groups. Particularly, GS does not show any significant differences among subjects (-19.93 ± 4) practicing exercise as prescription when compared to the DBA competitive trained group. 2DSTE method is an appropriate method to supervise the intensity of exercise in breast cancer patients. Particularly, GLS can optimize and improve cancer therapy supporting and creating efficiencies within the health system confirming the role of the exercise prescription therapy in maintaining normal heart function. |
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 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 58 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 9 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 9% |
| Other | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 6 | 10% |
| Unknown | 23 | 40% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 10 | 17% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 17% |
| Sports and Recreations | 4 | 7% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 5% |
| Unknown | 27 | 47% |
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 22 March 2018.
All research outputs
#18,571,001
of 23,001,641 outputs
Outputs from Internal and Emergency Medicine
#705
of 952 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#242,026
of 315,613 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Internal and Emergency Medicine
#9
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,001,641 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 952 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.7. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% 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 315,613 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.