↓ Skip to main content

Value of CT pulmonary angiography to predict short-term outcome in patient with pulmonary embolism

Overview of attention for article published in The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (54th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
34 Mendeley
Title
Value of CT pulmonary angiography to predict short-term outcome in patient with pulmonary embolism
Published in
The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging, January 2018
DOI 10.1007/s10554-018-1304-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ahmed M. Osman, Emad H. Abdeldayem

Abstract

To evaluate the role of CT pulmonary angiography (CTPA) in the assessment of pulmonary embolism (PE) severity and the related CT cardiac changes, reflecting the clinical status of the patients and predicting the outcome. A prospective study of 184 patients presented with suspicious acute PE. All patients underwent CTPA followed by ECHO. Pulmonary artery obstructive index (PAOI) using Qanadli Score was calculated and cardiac changes recorded. The patients' outcome was followed up for 30 days. Only 150 patients completed the study; 26.7% needed ICU admission while 13.3% died during follow-up. There was a significant relationship between the PAOI and the risk classification, right ventricular dysfunction (RVD) diagnosed by ECHO and the patients' short outcome. We found PAOI cut off value 45% for mortality and 35% for ICU admission and 27.5% for RVD with 60, 75 and 90% sensitivity and 80, 73.3 and 68.6% specificity respectively. CT RV/LV ratio was the most sensitive parameter to predict RV dysfunction followed by pulmonary artery diameter. CTPA is not only used for diagnosis but also to assess the severity of PE, the effect on the right ventricular function and subsequently the need for ICU admission and prediction of the outcome.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 34 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 18%
Student > Bachelor 6 18%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 12%
Student > Master 3 9%
Student > Postgraduate 2 6%
Other 5 15%
Unknown 8 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 59%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 15%
Materials Science 1 3%
Unknown 8 24%
Attention Score in Context

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 21 January 2018.
All research outputs
#17,292,294
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging
#938
of 2,012 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#285,217
of 451,277 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging
#15
of 35 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 451,277 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 35 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 54% of its contemporaries.