| Title |
Hybrid CCTA/SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging findings in patients with anomalous origin of coronary arteries from the opposite sinus and suspected concomitant coronary artery disease
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Nuclear Cardiology, December 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12350-015-0342-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Christoph Gräni, Dominik C Benz, Christian Schmied, Jan Vontobel, Fran Mikulicic, Mathias Possner, Olivier F Clerc, Julia Stehli, Tobias A Fuchs, Aju P Pazhenkottil, Oliver Gaemperli, Ronny R Buechel, Philipp A Kaufmann |
| Abstract |
Anomalous coronary arteries originating from the opposite sinus of Valsalva (ACAOS) are associated with adverse cardiac events. Discrimination between ACAOS and coronary artery disease (CAD)-related perfusion defects may be difficult. The aim of the present study was to investigate the value of hybrid coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA)/SPECT-MPI in patients with ACAOS and possible concomitant CAD. We retrospectively identified 46 patients (mean age 56 ± 12 years) with ACAOS revealed by CCTA who underwent additional SPECT-MPI. ACAOS with an interarterial course were classified as malignant, whereas all other variants were considered benign. CCTA/SPECT-MPI hybrid imaging findings (ischemia or scar) were analyzed according to the territory subtended by an anomalous vessel or a stenotic coronary artery. Twenty-six (57%) patients presented with malignant ACAOS. Myocardial ischemia or scar was found only in patients who had concomitant obstructive CAD in the vessel matching the perfusion defect as evidenced by hybrid CCTA/SPECT imaging. Hybrid CCTA/SPECT-MPI represents a valuable non-invasive tool to discriminate the impact of ACAOS from concomitant CAD on myocardial ischemia. Our results suggest that in a middle-aged population myocardial ischemia due to ACAOS per se may be exceedingly rare and is more likely attributable to concomitant CAD. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 19 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 16% |
| Researcher | 3 | 16% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 11% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 5 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 47% |
| Engineering | 3 | 16% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 6 | 32% |
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 30 December 2015.
All research outputs
#16,048,318
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Nuclear Cardiology
#1,124
of 2,044 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#217,576
of 398,284 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Nuclear Cardiology
#26
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% 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 is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% 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 398,284 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.