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 |
Fully quantitative pixel-wise analysis of cardiovascular magnetic resonance perfusion improves discrimination of dark rim artifact from perfusion defects associated with epicardial coronary stenosis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging, March 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12968-018-0436-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Allison D. Ta, Li-Yueh Hsu, Hannah M. Conn, Susanne Winkler, Anders M. Greve, Sujata M. Shanbhag, Marcus Y. Chen, W. Patricia Bandettini, Andrew E. Arai |
| Abstract |
Dark rim artifacts in first-pass cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) perfusion images can mimic perfusion defects and affect diagnostic accuracy for coronary artery disease (CAD). We evaluated whether quantitative myocardial blood flow (MBF) can differentiate dark rim artifacts from true perfusion defects in CMR perfusion. Regadenoson perfusion CMR was performed at 1.5 T in 76 patients. Significant CAD was defined by quantitative invasive coronary angiography (QCA) ≥ 50% diameter stenosis. Non-significant CAD (NonCAD) was defined as stenosis by QCA < 50% diameter stenosis or computed tomographic coronary angiography (CTA) < 30% in all major epicardial arteries. Dark rim artifacts had study specific and guideline-based definitions for comparison purposes. MBF was quantified at the pixel-level and sector-level. In a NonCAD subgroup with dark rim artifacts, stress MBF was lower in the subendocardial than midmyocardial and epicardial layers (2.17 ± 0.61 vs. 3.06 ± 0.75 vs. 3.24 ± 0.80 mL/min/g, both p < 0.001) and was also 30% lower than in remote regions (2.17 ± 0.61 vs. 2.83 ± 0.67 mL/min/g, p < 0.001). However, subendocardial stress MBF in dark rim artifacts was 37-56% higher than in true perfusion defects (2.17 ± 0.61 vs. 0.95 ± 0.43 mL/min/g, p < 0.001). Absolute stress MBF differentiated CAD from NonCAD with an accuracy ranging from 86 to 89% (all p < 0.001) using pixel-level analyses. Similar results were seen at a sector level. Quantitative stress MBF is lower in dark rim artifacts than remote myocardium but significantly higher than in true perfusion defects. If confirmed in larger series, this approach may aid the interpretation of clinical stress perfusion exams. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00027170 ; first posted 11/28/2001; updated 11/27/2017. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 4 | 31% |
| Cyprus | 1 | 8% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 8% |
| Spain | 1 | 8% |
| Chile | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 5 | 38% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 9 | 69% |
| Scientists | 2 | 15% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 8% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 8% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 34 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 8 | 24% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 9% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Lecturer | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 3 | 9% |
| Unknown | 13 | 38% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 26% |
| Engineering | 5 | 15% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 3% |
| Energy | 1 | 3% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Unknown | 15 | 44% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 10 May 2018.
All research outputs
#4,629,251
of 25,523,622 outputs
Outputs from Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging
#285
of 1,379 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#84,698
of 348,886 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging
#11
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,523,622 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,379 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% 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 348,886 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 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.