↓ Skip to main content

Mortality in Robin sequence: identification of risk factors

Overview of attention for article published in European Journal of Pediatrics, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
37 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
63 Mendeley
Title
Mortality in Robin sequence: identification of risk factors
Published in
European Journal of Pediatrics, February 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00431-018-3111-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Robrecht J. H. Logjes, Maartje Haasnoot, Petra M. A. Lemmers, Mike F. A. Nicolaije, Marie-José H. van den Boogaard, Aebele B. Mink van der Molen, Corstiaan C. Breugem

Abstract

Although Robin sequence (RS) is a well-known phenomenon, it is still associated with considerable morbidity and even mortality. The purposes of this study were to gain greater insight into the mortality rate and identify risk factors associated with mortality in RS. We retrospectively reviewed all RS infants followed at the Wilhelmina Children's Hospital from 1995 to 2016. Outcome measurements were death and causes of death. The authors identified 103 consecutive RS infants with a median follow-up of 8.6 years (range 0.1-21.9 years). Ten of the 103 infants (10%) died at a median age of 0.8 years (range 0.1-5.9 years). Nine of these ten infants (90%) were diagnosed with an associated syndrome. Of these, seven infants died of respiratory insufficiency due to various causes (two related to upper airway obstruction). The other two syndromic RS infants died of arrhythmia due to hypernatremia and of West syndrome with status epilepticus. One isolated RS infant died of brain ischemia after MDO surgery. Cardiac anomalies were observed in 41% and neurological anomalies in 36%. The presence of a neurological anomaly was associated with a mortality rate of 40% versus 7% in infants with no neurological anomaly (p = 0.016), with an odds ratio of 8.3 (95% CI 1.4-49.0) for neurological anomaly versus no neurological anomaly. Mortality was 15% in infants with syndromic RS versus 2% in infants with isolated RS (p = 0.044). Mortality was not significantly associated with the presence of a cardiac anomaly, surgical treatment for severe respiratory distress in the neonatal period, or prematurity. RS represents a heterogeneous patient population and is associated with a high level of underlying syndromes. The present study reports a mortality rate of 10% significantly associated with syndromic RS and the presence of neurological anomalies. A multidisciplinary approach in all infants born with RS, including genetic testing and examination of neurological anomalies in a standardized way, is crucial to identify infants with underlying syndromes potentially associated with increased mortality. What is Known: • Reported mortality rates in Robin sequence vary from 2% to 26%. • Clinicians mainly focus on the morbidity of Robin sequence that includes respiratory complications due to upper airway obstruction in the period after birth. • Robin sequence represents a heterogeneous patient population and is associated with a high level of underlying syndromes. What is New: • The present study reports a mortality rate of 10% significantly associated with syndromic Robin sequence and the presence of neurological anomalies. • A multidisciplinary approach in all infants born with Robin sequence, including genetic evaluation and standardized workup for neurological anomalies, is crucial to identify infants with underlying syndromes potentially associated with increased mortality.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 63 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 17%
Student > Bachelor 8 13%
Student > Postgraduate 6 10%
Other 3 5%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 5%
Other 11 17%
Unknown 21 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 29 46%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Unspecified 1 2%
Psychology 1 2%
Other 3 5%
Unknown 24 38%
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 07 June 2018.
All research outputs
#12,871,803
of 23,025,074 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Pediatrics
#2,192
of 3,757 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#156,503
of 330,530 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Pediatrics
#44
of 61 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,025,074 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,757 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.7. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% 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 330,530 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 61 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.