↓ Skip to main content

Current management of thoracic outlet syndrome

Overview of attention for article published in Current Treatment Options in Cardiovascular Medicine, March 2009
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

wikipedia
4 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
83 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
62 Mendeley
Title
Current management of thoracic outlet syndrome
Published in
Current Treatment Options in Cardiovascular Medicine, March 2009
DOI 10.1007/s11936-009-0018-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mark W. Fugate, Lisa Rotellini-Coltvet, Julie A. Freischlag

Abstract

Thoracic outlet syndrome (TOS) is a condition caused by compression of the neurovascular structures leading to the arm passing through the thoracic outlet. There are three distinct types of TOS: neurogenic (95%), venous (4%-5%), and arterial (1%). Treatment algorithms depend on the type of TOS. Although statistically the most common type, neurogenic TOS can often be the most difficult to diagnose and treat. We have good follow-up data indicating that appropriately selected patients benefit from surgical intervention. Arterial and venous TOS often present more urgently with arterial or venous thrombosis. The thrombosis is typically recognized expeditiously by thorough history taking and physical examination, augmented by duplex ultrasonography. The restoration of blood flow, be it venous or arterial, often can be accomplished readily by thrombolysis. The key, however, comes in diagnosing the underlying structural component involved in the development of symptoms. To prevent recurrence, patients must undergo first rib resection and anterior scalenectomy, as well as resection of any rudimentary or cervical ribs. In the case of arterial TOS, the subclavian artery often requires reconstruction as well. Regardless of the type of TOS encountered, proper treatment requires a multidisciplinary approach.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 62 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Norway 1 2%
Australia 1 2%
Unknown 60 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 7 11%
Researcher 7 11%
Student > Bachelor 7 11%
Student > Master 7 11%
Student > Postgraduate 6 10%
Other 13 21%
Unknown 15 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 27 44%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 8%
Sports and Recreations 4 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Neuroscience 2 3%
Other 3 5%
Unknown 19 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 08 December 2019.
All research outputs
#7,452,489
of 22,783,848 outputs
Outputs from Current Treatment Options in Cardiovascular Medicine
#149
of 410 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#32,857
of 93,156 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Treatment Options in Cardiovascular Medicine
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,783,848 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 410 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.6. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% 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 93,156 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them