↓ Skip to main content

Endovaskuläre vs. konventionelle Gefäßchirurgie – antiquiertes Denken?

Overview of attention for article published in Die Chirurgie, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
1 Mendeley
Title
Endovaskuläre vs. konventionelle Gefäßchirurgie – antiquiertes Denken?
Published in
Die Chirurgie, January 2016
DOI 10.1007/s00104-015-0149-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

E. S. Debus, D. Manzoni, C.-A. Behrendt, F. Heidemann, R. T. Grundmann

Abstract

Endovascular therapy has widely replaced conventional open vascular surgical reconstruction. For this reason, both techniques were widely considered to be competing approaches. Evidence-based data from randomized prospective trials, meta-analyses and clinical registries, however, demonstrated that both techniques should be used to complement each other. It became increasingly more evident that the use of either procedure depends on the underlying disease and the anatomical conditions, whereby a combination of both (hybrid approach) may be the preferred option in certain situations. This review focuses on the treatment of patients with carotid artery stenosis, intermittent claudication, critical limb ischemia and acute limb ischemia.

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.
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 January 2016.
All research outputs
#22,759,452
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Die Chirurgie
#294
of 435 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#345,545
of 403,895 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Die Chirurgie
#4
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 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 435 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.2. 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 403,895 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 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.