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 |
Tratamento híbrido das doenças do arco aórtico
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Revista Brasileira de Cirurgia Cardiovascular, January 2014
|
| DOI | 10.5935/1678-9741.20140056 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Patrick Bastos Metzger, Fabio Henrique Rossi, Samuel Martins Moreira, Mario Issa, Nilo Mitsuru Izukawa, Jarbas J. Dinkhuysen, Domingos Spina Neto, Antônio Massamitsu Kambara |
| Abstract |
Introduction: The management of thoracic aortic disease involving the ascending aorta, aortic arch and descending thoracic aorta are technically challenging and is an area in constant development and innovation. Objective: To analyze early and midterm results of hybrid treatment of arch aortic disease. Methods: Retrospective study of procedures performed from January 2010 to December 2012. The end points were the technical success, therapeutic success, morbidity and mortality, neurologic outcomes, the rate of endoleaks and reinterventions. Results: A total of 95 patients treated for thoracic aortic diseases in this period, 18 underwent hybrid treatment and entered in this study. The average ages were 62.3 years. The male was present in 66.7%. The technical and therapeutic success was 94.5% e 83.3%. The perioperative mortality rate of 11.1%. There is any death during one-year follow- up. The reoperation rates were 16.6% due 2 cases of endoleak Ia and one case of endoleak II. There is any occlusion of anatomic or extra anatomic bypass during follow up. Conclusion: In our study, the hybrid treatment of aortic arch disease proved to be a feasible alternative of conventional surgery. The therapeutic success rates and re- interventions obtained demonstrate the necessity of thorough clinical follow-up of these patients in a long time. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| India | 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 11 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 11 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Professor | 1 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 9% |
| Researcher | 1 | 9% |
| Unknown | 8 | 73% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 27% |
| Unknown | 8 | 73% |
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 27 February 2015.
All research outputs
#21,011,157
of 25,806,080 outputs
Outputs from Revista Brasileira de Cirurgia Cardiovascular
#215
of 366 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#245,657
of 321,518 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Revista Brasileira de Cirurgia Cardiovascular
#14
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,806,080 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 366 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.1. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% 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 321,518 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 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.