↓ Skip to main content

Antithrombotic Therapy After Peripheral Vascular Intervention

Overview of attention for article published in Current Cardiology Reports, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
32 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
Antithrombotic Therapy After Peripheral Vascular Intervention
Published in
Current Cardiology Reports, February 2016
DOI 10.1007/s11886-016-0706-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Peter Hu, Schuyler Jones

Abstract

Cardioprotective medications and risk-factor modification are the hallmarks of treatment for all patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD). If symptoms are life-limiting and/or do not respond to conservative treatment, endovascular or surgical revascularization can be considered especially for patients with critical limb ischemia or acute limb ischemia. The rates of peripheral vascular intervention (PVI) have risen dramatically over the past few decades and much of this care have shifted from inpatient hospital settings to outpatient settings and office-based clinics. While PVI rates have surged and technology advancements have dramatically changed the face of PVI, the data behind optimal antithrombotic therapy following PVI is scant. Currently in the USA, most patients are treated with indefinite aspirin therapy and a variable duration of clopidogrel (or other P2Y12 inhibitor)-typically 1 month, 3 months, or indefinite therapy. More observational analyses and randomized clinical trials evaluating clinically relevant outcomes such as cardiovascular morbidity/mortality and the risk of bleeding are needed to guide the optimal role and duration of antithrombotic therapy post-PVI.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 32 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 4 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 9%
Other 3 9%
Researcher 3 9%
Student > Postgraduate 2 6%
Other 6 19%
Unknown 11 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 47%
Computer Science 2 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Social Sciences 1 3%
Neuroscience 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 12 38%
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 05 February 2016.
All research outputs
#20,303,950
of 22,842,950 outputs
Outputs from Current Cardiology Reports
#908
of 999 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#333,927
of 397,089 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Cardiology Reports
#25
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,842,950 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 999 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. 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 397,089 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 34 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.