| Title |
Molecular tissue changes in early myocardial ischemia: from pathophysiology to the identification of new diagnostic markers
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Legal Medicine, January 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00414-017-1750-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Aleksandra Aljakna, Tony Fracasso, Sara Sabatasso |
| Abstract |
Diagnosing early myocardial ischemia (the initial 4 to 6 h after interruption of blood flow to part of the myocardium) remains a challenge for clinical and forensic pathologists. Several immunohistochemical markers have been proposed for improving postmortem detection of early myocardial ischemia; however, no single marker appears to be both sufficiently specific as well as sensitive. This review summarizes the diverse categories of molecular tissue markers that have been investigated in human autopsy samples with acute myocardial infarction as well as in the well-established and widely used in vivo animal model of early myocardial ischemia (permanent ligation of the coronary artery). Recently identified markers appearing during the initial 2 h of myocardial ischemia are highlighted. Among them, only six were tested for specificity (C5b-9, hypoxia-inducible factor 1-alpha, vascular endothelial growth factor, heart fatty acid binding protein, connexin 43, and JunB). Despite the discovery of several potentially promising markers (in terms of early expression and specificity), many of them remain to be tested and validated for application in routine diagnostics in clinical and forensic pathology. In particular, research investigating the postmortem stability of these markers is required before any might be implemented into routine diagnostics. Establishing a standardized panel of immunohistochemical markers may be more useful for improving sensitivity and specificity than searching for a single marker. |
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 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 45 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 16% |
| Researcher | 6 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 11% |
| Other | 4 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 8 | 18% |
| Unknown | 12 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 14 | 31% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 7 | 16% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 9% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 7% |
| Chemistry | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 2 | 4% |
| Unknown | 14 | 31% |
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 January 2018.
All research outputs
#15,489,831
of 23,018,998 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Legal Medicine
#973
of 2,085 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#269,985
of 441,019 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Legal Medicine
#27
of 57 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,018,998 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,085 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% 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 441,019 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% 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 is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.