↓ Skip to main content

Multidetector CT and MR imaging cardiac hydatidosis: case report and review of the literature

Overview of attention for article published in The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging, October 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
7 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
Multidetector CT and MR imaging cardiac hydatidosis: case report and review of the literature
Published in
The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging, October 2011
DOI 10.1007/s10554-011-9958-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yan Xing, Dilimulati Bawudong, Wen-Bin Zhang, Wen-Ya Liu, Cun-Xue Pan, Hao Wen, Chen-Wei Li

Abstract

Cardiac hydatid cysts are uncommon but potentially fatal. We present a case of isolated unilocular and multivesicular hydatid cysts in the heart, and provide a literature review of this rare condition. A 35-year-old man presented to our cardiology unit with acute chest pain. Computed tomography showed two cystic lesions in the heart. One unilocular cyst was located close to the left atrium and compressed the pulmonary artery. The other multivesicular cyst adhered to the left ventricle and displaced the left coronary arteries. T2-weighted magnetic resonance images revealed lesions in the pericardial cavity with bright signal intensity. Dot immunogold filtration assay was performed, and positive results for anti-EgCF antibody, anti-EgP antibody and anti-EgB antibody for cystic hydatidosis were found. Cardiac hydatidosis was diagnosed because of typical imaging findings and positive serology. The patient underwent surgical excision of the cysts. Postoperatively, symptoms of the patient resolved.

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 7 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 7 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 3 43%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 14%
Researcher 1 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 14%
Unknown 1 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 4 57%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 14%
Unknown 2 29%
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 04 November 2011.
All research outputs
#17,285,668
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging
#938
of 2,012 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#105,327
of 151,225 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging
#8
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,012 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.3. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% 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 151,225 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 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 52% of its contemporaries.