↓ Skip to main content

Negative angiographic markers in percutaneous coronary intervention of chronic total occlusions.

Overview of attention for article published in Archivos de cardiología de México, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
4 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
Negative angiographic markers in percutaneous coronary intervention of chronic total occlusions.
Published in
Archivos de cardiología de México, March 2017
DOI 10.1016/j.acmx.2017.01.008
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mohsen Mohandes, Jordi Guarinos, Judit Rodríguez, Gil Bonet, Francisco Fernández, Sergio Rojas, Cristina Moreno, Ramón de Castro, Jordi Mercé, Alfredo Bardají

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to identify negative angiographic predictive variables and the presence of a side branch close to the occlusion distal cap in the chronic total occlusion percutaneous coronary intervention outcome. Potential negative angiographic variables were retrospectively evaluated in 156 chronic total occlusions undergone a percutaneous coronary intervention. Binary logistic regression with predictive purpose was utilized in order to identify a model of variables which all in all could successfully predict a negative intervention result. Variables independently associated with the procedural failure were multivessel disease (odds ratio=5,12; 95% confident interval, 1,94-13,5; P=0.001), ambiguous stump presence (odds ratio = 5,08; 95% confident interval, 2,22-11,63 P<0.001), occlusion length≥20 mm (odds ratio= 3,7; 95% confident interval, 1,37-9,97 P=0.01) and ostial location (odds ratio = 6,53; 95% confident interval, 1,67-25,63; P=0.007). Side branch at distal cap proximity did not remain in the predictive model. Multivessel disease, ambiguous stump, a length≥20 mm and ostial location of a chronic total occlusion are independent predictive factors of an unfavourable angioplasty result. A side branch at occlusion distal cap did not associate with the procedural failure.

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 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 %
Professor 1 25%
Researcher 1 25%
Student > Postgraduate 1 25%
Unknown 1 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 2 50%
Unknown 2 50%
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 21 March 2017.
All research outputs
#20,660,571
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Archivos de cardiología de México
#142
of 237 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#251,464
of 324,513 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Archivos de cardiología de México
#2
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 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 324,513 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.