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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Electrical storm in patients with prophylactic defibrillator implantation.
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Archivos de cardiología de México, June 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.acmx.2015.04.008 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Moisés Rodríguez-Mañero, Cristina González-Cambeiro, Jose Moreno-Arribas, Víctor Expósito-García, Juan Miguel Sánchez-Gómez, Luis González-Torres, Álvaro Arce-León, Hugo Arguedas-Jiménez, Larraitz Gaztañaga, Oscar Salvador-Montañés, Jose Antonio Iglesias-Bravo, Ana Andrés La Huerta, Juan Fernández-Armenta, Miguel Ángel Arias, Luis Martínez-Sande |
| Abstract |
Little is known about the prevalence of electrical storm, baseline characteristics and mortality implications of patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillator in primary prevention versus those patients without electrical storm. We sought to assess the prevalence, baseline risk profile and survival significance of electrical storm in patients with implantable defibrillator for primary prevention. Retrospective multicenter study performed in 15 Spanish hospitals. Consecutives patients referred for desfibrillator implantation, with or without left ventricular lead (at least those performed in 2010 and 2011), were included. Over all 1,174 patients, 34 (2,9%) presented an electrical storm, mainly due to ventricular tachycardia (82.4%). There were no significant baseline differences between groups, with similar punctuation in the mortality risk scores (SHOCKED, MADIT and FADES). A clear trigger was identified in 47% of the events. During the study period (38±21 months), long-term total mortality (58.8% versus 14.4%, p<0.001) and cardiac mortality (52.9% versus 8.6%, p<0.001) were both increased among electrical storm patients. Rate of inappropriate desfibrillator intervention was also higher (14.7 versus 8.6%, p<0.001). In the present study of patients with desfibrillator implantation for primary prevention, prevalence of electrical storm was 2.9%. There were no baseline differences in the cardiovascular risk profile versus those without electrical storm. However, all cause mortality and cardiovascular mortality was increased in these patients versus control desfibrillator patients without electrical storm, as was the rate of inappropriate desfibrillator intervention. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 4 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 4 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 25% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 50% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
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 07 July 2016.
All research outputs
#20,657,128
of 25,377,790 outputs
Outputs from Archivos de cardiología de México
#142
of 237 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#205,503
of 280,069 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Archivos de cardiología de México
#4
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,377,790 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 237 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% 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 280,069 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.