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 |
Spontaneous fracture and migration of catheter of a totally implantable venous access port via internal jugular vein - a case report
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery, April 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13019-016-0450-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Seung Yeon Ko, Sun Cheol Park, Jeong Kye Hwang, Sang Dong Kim |
| Abstract |
The totally implantable venous access ports (TIVAPs) are indicated for patients undergoing chemotherapy, total parenteral nutrition and long-term antibiotic treatment. But, among their complications, the fracture and migration of the catheter of a TIVAP via internal jugular vein represents a very rare but potentially severe condition. A 50-year-old woman indentified with a spontaneous fracture and migration of catheter of a TIVAP via right internal jugular vein after adjuvant chemotherapy for ovary cancer. She had been not evaluated and not managed with the heparin lock flush solution during three months after adjuvant chemotherapy. And then, she complained right neck bulging during saline infusion via a TIVAP and a chest radiography showed the fractured and migrated catheter of a TIVAP in right atrium. So, we emergently removed the catheter fragment by a goose neck snare via right femoral vein. After then, there was no problem. If the fractured catheter of a TIVAP is detected, it is desirable to remove a fragment by an endovascular approach if it is possible. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 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 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 > Bachelor | 5 | 14% |
| Other | 5 | 14% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 6% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 4 | 11% |
| Unknown | 13 | 37% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 26% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 20% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 3% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 3% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 15 | 43% |
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 14 April 2016.
All research outputs
#22,756,649
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery
#1,075
of 1,382 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#273,282
of 316,333 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery
#14
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,382 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.9. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 316,333 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.