↓ Skip to main content

Diagnostic and prognostic role of cardiac magnetic resonance in acute myocarditis

Overview of attention for article published in Heart Failure Reviews, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
34 Mendeley
Title
Diagnostic and prognostic role of cardiac magnetic resonance in acute myocarditis
Published in
Heart Failure Reviews, July 2018
DOI 10.1007/s10741-018-9724-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Chrysanthos Grigoratos, Gianluca Di Bella, Giovanni Donato Aquaro

Abstract

Acute myocarditis (AM) is commonly found in everyday clinical practice. Differential diagnosis between various causes of myocardial damage with non-obstructive coronary arteries can be cumbersome for clinician. Moreover, AM may be provoked by a number of different causes and clinical presentation can be heterogeneous with potential overlap going from asymptomatic or subclinical to severe heart failure, arrhythmias, and death. Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) over the last decades has proven to be the diagnostic technique of choice since it allows identifying AM with excellent diagnostic accuracy. Latest technological advancement with parametric imaging such as T1 and T2 mapping further increases sensitivity and provides additional help towards a correct diagnosis. CMR however is no longer to be considered as a mere diagnostic tool but also as a powerful source of prognostic information. Scientific evidence has corroborated CMR's role beyond diagnosis demonstrating how late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) presence is a powerful predictor of cardiac events and how the presence of septal LGE is to be considered of worst prognosis regardless of LGE extension even in patients with preserved global systolic function. CMR should be routinely performed in all patients with AM suspicion since its diagnostic and prognostic role is of paramount important and could modify therapeutic strategy and subsequent clinical decisions.

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 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 34 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 7 21%
Researcher 5 15%
Student > Bachelor 4 12%
Other 4 12%
Student > Postgraduate 2 6%
Other 5 15%
Unknown 7 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 59%
Psychology 2 6%
Arts and Humanities 1 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 3%
Unknown 10 29%
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 24 July 2018.
All research outputs
#20,527,576
of 23,096,849 outputs
Outputs from Heart Failure Reviews
#613
of 672 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#288,123
of 329,731 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Heart Failure Reviews
#10
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,096,849 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 672 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. 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 329,731 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 11 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.