| Title |
Clinical characteristics in lymphangioleiomyomatosis-related pulmonary hypertension: an observation on 50 patients
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers of Medicine, April 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11684-018-0634-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Xiuxiu Wu, Wenshuai Xu, Jun Wang, Xinlun Tian, Zhuang Tian, Kaifeng Xu |
| Abstract |
Lymphangioleiomyomatosis (LAM) is a rare diffuse cystic lung disease. Knowledge on LAM-related pulmonary hypertension (PH) is limited. This study aimed to analyze the clinical characteristics of LAM with elevated pulmonary artery pressure (PAP) and evaluate the potential efficacy of sirolimus. The study involved 50 LAM patients who underwent echocardiography. According to the tricuspid regurgitation velocity (TRV), these patients were divided into the TRV ≤ 2.8 m/s group and TRV > 2.8 m/s group. Both groups comprised 25 females with an average age of 38.6 8.1 and 41.5 8.9 years. In the TRV > 2.8 m/s group, the estimated systolic PAP (SPAP) was significantly elevated (52.08 12.45 mmHg vs. 30.24 5.25 mmHg, P < 0.01). Linear analysis showed that SPAP was correlated with forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), diffusing capacity of the lungs for carbon monoxide, alveolar arterial oxygen gradient (PA-aO2), and 6 min walking distance (r =-0.392,-0.351, 0.450, and-0.591, respectively; P < 0.05), in which PA-aO2 was a risk factor for SPAP elevation (β = 0.064, OR = 1.066, P < 0.05). Moreover, in 10 patients who received sirolimus therapy, SPAP decreased from 57.0 12.6 mmHg to 35.2 11.1 mmHg. The study showed that LAM patients with PH exhibit poor pulmonary function and hypoxemia and may benefit from sirolimus treatment. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Mexico | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 22 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 4 | 18% |
| Researcher | 4 | 18% |
| Other | 3 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 9% |
| Professor | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 3 | 14% |
| Unknown | 5 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 36% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 9% |
| Engineering | 2 | 9% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 8 | 36% |
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 April 2018.
All research outputs
#17,945,904
of 23,043,346 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers of Medicine
#203
of 351 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#237,657
of 327,380 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers of Medicine
#7
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,043,346 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 351 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 327,380 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.