↓ Skip to main content

Middle aortic syndrome—an 8-year story of pills, pretty balloons and struts

Overview of attention for article published in Pediatric Nephrology, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
20 Mendeley
Title
Middle aortic syndrome—an 8-year story of pills, pretty balloons and struts
Published in
Pediatric Nephrology, May 2015
DOI 10.1007/s00467-015-3118-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Elisabeth Day, Jelena Stojanovic, Narayan Karunanthy, Shakeel Qureshi, John Reidy, Manish D. Sinha

Abstract

Middle aortic syndrome (MAS) is an uncommon cause of hypertension in children. The management of hypertension secondary to MAS frequently requires several anti-hypertensive medications along with endovascular and often surgical intervention. A 9-year-old boy presented with headaches and vomiting and was diagnosed with severe hypertension secondary to idiopathic MAS affecting a long segment of the abdominal aorta and left renal artery stenosis. Over the following 8 years his hypertension was successfully managed initially with percutaneous transluminal balloon angioplasty (PTA) of his left renal artery, followed by balloon dilatation of his abdominal aortic narrowing. He subsequently underwent abdominal aortic stent placement following failed repeat aortic balloon dilatation. Aged 17 years and 6 months he is now on a single anti-hypertensive agent with normal renal function and no evidence of target organ damage. In selected cases, MAS may be managed with PTA and stent placement with good long-term outcomes. Limited data on the use of PTA and stent insertion in children means that a structured approach to the management of refractory hypertension secondary to MAS remains elusive.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 5%
Unknown 19 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 3 15%
Librarian 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 5%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 1 5%
Other 4 20%
Unknown 9 45%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 30%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 5%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 10 50%
Attention Score in Context

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 09 May 2015.
All research outputs
#20,271,607
of 22,803,211 outputs
Outputs from Pediatric Nephrology
#3,293
of 3,537 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#222,567
of 264,541 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pediatric Nephrology
#44
of 62 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,803,211 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,537 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 264,541 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 62 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.