↓ Skip to main content

In vivo MRI and ex vivo histological assessment of the cardioprotection induced by ischemic preconditioning, postconditioning and remote conditioning in a closed-chest porcine model of reperfused…

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Translational Medicine, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
35 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
In vivo MRI and ex vivo histological assessment of the cardioprotection induced by ischemic preconditioning, postconditioning and remote conditioning in a closed-chest porcine model of reperfused acute myocardial infarction: importance of microvasculature
Published in
Journal of Translational Medicine, April 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12967-017-1166-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tamás Baranyai, Zoltán Giricz, Zoltán V. Varga, Gábor Koncsos, Dominika Lukovic, András Makkos, Márta Sárközy, Noémi Pávó, András Jakab, Csilla Czimbalmos, Hajnalka Vágó, Zoltán Ruzsa, Levente Tóth, Rita Garamvölgyi, Béla Merkely, Rainer Schulz, Mariann Gyöngyösi, Péter Ferdinandy

Abstract

Cardioprotective value of ischemic post- (IPostC), remote (RIC) conditioning in acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is unclear in clinical trials. To evaluate cardioprotection, most translational animal studies and clinical trials utilize necrotic tissue referred to the area at risk (AAR) by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). However, determination of AAR by MRI' may not be accurate, since MRI-indices of microvascular damage, i.e., myocardial edema and microvascular obstruction (MVO), may be affected by cardioprotection independently from myocardial necrosis. Therefore, we assessed the effect of IPostC, RIC conditioning and ischemic preconditioning (IPreC; positive control) on myocardial necrosis, edema and MVO in a clinically relevant, closed-chest pig model of AMI. Acute myocardial infarction was induced by a 90-min balloon occlusion of the left anterior descending coronary artery (LAD) in domestic juvenile female pigs. IPostC (6 × 30 s ischemia/reperfusion after 90-min occlusion) and RIC (4 × 5 min hind limb ischemia/reperfusion during 90-min LAD occlusion) did not reduce myocardial necrosis as assessed by late gadolinium enhancement 3 days after reperfusion and by ex vivo triphenyltetrazolium chloride staining 3 h after reperfusion, however, the positive control, IPreC (3 × 5 min ischemia/reperfusion before 90-min LAD occlusion) did. IPostC and RIC attenuated myocardial edema as measured by cardiac T2-weighted MRI 3 days after reperfusion, however, AAR measured by Evans blue staining was not different among groups, which confirms that myocardial edema is not a measure of AAR, IPostC and IPreC but not RIC decreased MVO. We conclude that IPostC and RIC interventions may protect the coronary microvasculature even without reducing myocardial necrosis.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 35 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 29%
Researcher 6 17%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 11%
Other 3 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 6%
Other 6 17%
Unknown 4 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 51%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 9%
Neuroscience 2 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 6%
Energy 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 7 20%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 October 2017.
All research outputs
#7,221,605
of 12,022,940 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Translational Medicine
#1,246
of 2,331 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#139,307
of 265,982 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Translational Medicine
#37
of 65 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,022,940 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,331 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 265,982 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 65 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.