↓ Skip to main content

Can the Pulmonary Artery Wedge Pressure be Used Reliably as a Surrogate for the Left Atrial Mean Pressure in Pre-Fontan Evaluation?

Overview of attention for article published in Pediatric Cardiology, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
5 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Can the Pulmonary Artery Wedge Pressure be Used Reliably as a Surrogate for the Left Atrial Mean Pressure in Pre-Fontan Evaluation?
Published in
Pediatric Cardiology, July 2017
DOI 10.1007/s00246-017-1681-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bassel Mohammad Nijres, Ra-id Abdulla, Sawsan Awad, Joshua Murphy

Abstract

The correlation between mean pulmonary artery wedge pressure (PAWP) and left atrial mean pressure (LAMP) has been poorly studied in patients with single ventricle (SV) physiology (Bernstein et al. in Pediatr Cardiol 33: 15-20 2012). The aim of this study is to determine if the PAWP can be used safely as a surrogate to the LAMP to calculate the pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR) during the pre-Fontan evaluation. Also, we aimed to understand if the presence of significant systemic-to-pulmonary collaterals (SPCs) is a confounding factor for accurate estimation of the LAMP. From February 2007 to February 2017, forty-one patients were eligible for inclusion in the study. These patients were varied in terms of underlying cardiac malformation. Sex distribution was equal with 20 males and 21 females. Median weight was 11.8 kg, median body surface area was 0.51 m(2), median age at catheterization was 2 years, and the median age at Glenn surgery was 5 months. We found the left and right PAWP and LAMP correlated strongly and the differences in the measurements were negligible. Similar findings were observed when calculating PVRs using PAWP and LAMP. These findings were more pronounced in the absence of significant SPCs. PAWP and LAMP correlation was still valid in the presence of significant SPCs; however, the correlation among the calculated PVRs was more attenuated.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 5 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 20%
Other 1 20%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 20%
Unknown 2 40%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 2 40%
Sports and Recreations 1 20%
Unknown 2 40%
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 13 July 2017.
All research outputs
#20,434,884
of 22,988,380 outputs
Outputs from Pediatric Cardiology
#1,102
of 1,413 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#272,528
of 312,615 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pediatric Cardiology
#23
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,988,380 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 1,413 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.7. 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 312,615 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 38 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.