| Title |
Systematic Review of Circulating, Biomechanical, and Genetic Markers for the Prediction of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Growth and Rupture
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of the American Heart Association Cardiovascular and Cerebrovascular Disease, June 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1161/jaha.117.007791 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Menno E. Groeneveld, Jorn P. Meekel, Sidney M. Rubinstein, Lisanne R. Merkestein, Geert Jan Tangelder, Willem Wisselink, Maarten Truijers, Kak Khee Yeung |
| Abstract |
The natural course of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) is growth and rupture if left untreated. Numerous markers have been investigated; however, none are broadly acknowledged. Our aim was to identify potential prognostic markers for AAA growth and rupture. Potential circulating, biomechanical, and genetic markers were studied. A comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library in February 2017, following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Study selection, data extraction, and methodological quality assessment were conducted by 2 independent researchers. Plausibility of markers was based on the amount of publications regarding the marker (more than 3), pooled sample size (more than 100), bias risk and statistical significance of the studies. Eighty-two studies were included, which examined circulating (n=40), biomechanical (n=27), and genetic markers (n=7) and combinations of markers (n=8). Factors with an increased expansion risk included: AAA diameter (9 studies; n=1938; low bias risk), chlamydophila pneumonia (4 studies; n=311; medium bias risk), S-elastin peptides (3 studies; n=205; medium bias risk), fluorodeoxyglucose uptake (3 studies; n=104; medium bias risk), and intraluminal thrombus size (5 studies; n=758; medium bias risk). Factors with an increased rupture risk rupture included: peak wall stress (9 studies; n=579; medium bias risk) and AAA diameter (8 studies; n=354; medium bias risk). No meta-analysis was conducted because of clinical and methodological heterogeneity. We identified 5 potential markers with a prognostic value for AAA growth and 2 for rupture. While interpreting these data, one must realize that conclusions are based on small sample sizes and clinical and methodological heterogeneity. Prospective and methodological consonant studies are strongly urged to further study these potential markers. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 62 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 62 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 8% |
| Other | 4 | 6% |
| Researcher | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 9 | 15% |
| Unknown | 24 | 39% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 28 | 45% |
| Engineering | 3 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 2% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 2% |
| Chemistry | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 27 | 44% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 18 November 2022.
All research outputs
#2,865,192
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from Journal of the American Heart Association Cardiovascular and Cerebrovascular Disease
#2,394
of 8,240 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#56,628
of 342,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of the American Heart Association Cardiovascular and Cerebrovascular Disease
#75
of 218 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,240 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 31.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its peers.
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 342,554 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 218 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.