| Title |
Apparent left ventricular cavity dilatation during PET/CT in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: Clinical predictors and potential mechanisms
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Nuclear Cardiology, May 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12350-015-0158-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Paco E Bravo, Abdel Tahari, Iraklis Pozios, Hong-Chang Luo, Frank M Bengel, Richard L Wahl, M Roselle Abraham, Theodore P Abraham |
| Abstract |
Apparent left ventricular cavity dilatation (LVCD) in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) is an incompletely understood phenomenon. We aimed at investigating its clinical predictors and potential mechanisms. Sixty one HCM patients underwent N-13-ammonia PET for visual evaluation of LVCD, transient ischemic dilatation (TID) index, myocardial blood flow (MBF), coronary flow reserve (CFR), and regional myocardial perfusion (rMP). TID index was also derived at 2-4 and 15-20 minutes. Visual LVCD and quantitative TID (>1.13 abnormal) agreement were excellent (k 0.91; P < .0001). LVCD-positive (n = 32) patients had greater LV thickness (2.26 ± 0.59 vs 1.92 ± 0.41 cm; P = .005), but lower stress MBF (1.66 ± 0.42 vs 2.07 ± 0.46 mL/minute/g; P < .0001), and CFR (1.90 ± 0.46 vs 2.46 ± 0.69; P < .0001) than LVCD-negative (n = 29) patients. Abnormal rMP was present in 31/32 LVCD-positive but only 12/29 (P < .0001) LVCD-negative. TID index was higher at 2-4 (1.30 ± 0.13) than at 15-20 minutes (1.27 ± 0.12; P = .001) in LVCD-positive, whereas it was the same (1.04 ± 0.07 vs 1.04 ± 0.07; P = .9) in LVCD-negative. In multivariate analysis, global peak MBF, abnormal rMP, and LV thickness were the best predictors of LVCD. Apparent LVCD is a common finding in HCM, intimately related to abnormal myocardial perfusion, globally impaired vasodilator flow reserve, and degree of hypertrophy. In addition to regional and/or diffuse subendocardial ischemia, some degree of true LV chamber dilatation may also contribute to the occurrence of apparent LVCD in HCM. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 | 2 | 50% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 23 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 17% |
| Other | 3 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 9% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 4 | 17% |
| Unknown | 7 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 39% |
| Psychology | 3 | 13% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 4% |
| Engineering | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 9 | 39% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 22 May 2015.
All research outputs
#15,168,167
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Nuclear Cardiology
#977
of 2,044 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#137,565
of 280,276 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Nuclear Cardiology
#7
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,044 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 280,276 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.