| Title |
Bettseitige Implantation eines neuen passageren V.-cava-inferior-Filters
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Medizinische Klinik - Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin, May 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00063-017-0294-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
S. Baumann, T. Becher, K. Giannakopoulos, C. Jabbour, C. Fastner, I. El-Battrawy, U. Ansari, D. Lossnitzer, M. Behnes, A. Alonso, T. Kirschning, R. Dissmann, O. Kueck, D. Stern, G. Michels, M. Borggrefe, I. Akin |
| Abstract |
Pulmonary embolism (PE) is a frequently occurring complication in critically ill patients, and the simultaneous occurrence of PE and life-threatening bleeding is a therapeutic dilemma. Inferior vena cava filters (IVCF) may represent an important therapeutic alternative in these cases. The Angel® catheter (Bio2 Medical Inc., San Antonio, TX, USA) is a novel IVCF that provides temporary protection from PE and is implanted at bedside without fluoroscopy. The European Angel® Catheter Registry is an observational, multicenter study. In our German substudy, we investigated patients from three German hospitals and four intensive care units, who underwent Angel® catheter implantation between February 2016 and December 2016. A total of 23 critically ill patients (68 ± 9 years, 43% male) were included. The main indication for implantation was a high risk for or an established PE, combined with contraindications for prophylactic or therapeutic anticoagulation due to either an increased risk of bleeding (81%) or active bleeding (13%). The Angel® catheter was successfully inserted in all patients at bedside. No PE occurred in patients with an indwelling Angel® catheter. Clots with a diameter larger the 20 mm, indicating clot migration, were detected in 5% of the patients by cavography before filter retrieval. Filter retrieval was uneventful in all of our cases, while filter dislocation occurred in 3% of the patients. The German data from the multicenter European Angel® Catheter Registry show that the Angel® catheter is a safe and effective approach for critically ill patients with a high risk for the development of PE or an established PE, when an anticoagulation therapy is contraindicated. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 6 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 6 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 2 | 33% |
| Unknown | 4 | 67% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 33% |
| Unknown | 4 | 67% |
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 13 May 2018.
All research outputs
#20,488,697
of 23,051,185 outputs
Outputs from Medizinische Klinik - Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin
#233
of 540 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#270,761
of 311,053 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Medizinische Klinik - Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin
#6
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,051,185 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 540 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. 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 311,053 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 15 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.