| Title |
Update in the Percutaneous Management of Coronary Chronic Total Occlusions
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions, March 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.jcin.2017.10.052 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Peter Tajti, M Nicholas Burke, Dimitri Karmpaliotis, Khaldoon Alaswad, Gerald S Werner, Lorenzo Azzalini, Mauro Carlino, Mitul Patel, Kambis Mashayekhi, Mohaned Egred, Oleg Krestyaninov, Dmitrii Khelimskii, William J Nicholson, Imre Ungi, Alfredo R Galassi, Subhash Banerjee, Emmanouil S Brilakis |
| Abstract |
Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for chronic total occlusions (CTOs) has been rapidly evolving during recent years. With improvement in equipment and techniques, high success rates can be achieved at experienced centers, although overall success rates remain low. Prospective, randomized-controlled data regarding optimal use and indications for CTO PCI remain limited. CTO PCI should be performed when the anticipated benefit exceeds the potential risk. New high-quality studies of the clinical outcomes and techniques of CTO PCI are needed, as is the expansion of expert centers and operators that can achieve excellent clinical outcomes in this challenging patient and lesion subgroup. In the current review the authors summarize the latest publications in CTO PCI and provide an overview of the current state of the field. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 165 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 47 | 28% |
| Mexico | 15 | 9% |
| Spain | 13 | 8% |
| United Kingdom | 5 | 3% |
| Colombia | 5 | 3% |
| Chile | 4 | 2% |
| Netherlands | 3 | 2% |
| Canada | 3 | 2% |
| Argentina | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 17 | 10% |
| Unknown | 50 | 30% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 112 | 68% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 26 | 16% |
| Scientists | 20 | 12% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 7 | 4% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 119 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 119 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 24 | 20% |
| Other | 19 | 16% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 12 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 5% |
| Other | 12 | 10% |
| Unknown | 38 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 56 | 47% |
| Engineering | 5 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 3% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 5 | 4% |
| Unknown | 43 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 114. 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 24 March 2021.
All research outputs
#376,347
of 25,746,891 outputs
Outputs from JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions
#43
of 4,085 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,625
of 352,921 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions
#2
of 91 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,746,891 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,085 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its peers.
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 352,921 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 91 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.