↓ Skip to main content

Electrophysiological Mechanisms of Brugada Syndrome: Insights from Pre-clinical and Clinical Studies

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Physiology, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
44 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
67 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
Electrophysiological Mechanisms of Brugada Syndrome: Insights from Pre-clinical and Clinical Studies
Published in
Frontiers in Physiology, October 2016
DOI 10.3389/fphys.2016.00467
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gary Tse, Tong Liu, Ka H. C. Li, Victoria Laxton, Yin W. F. Chan, Wendy Keung, Ronald A. Li, Bryan P. Yan

Abstract

Brugada syndrome (BrS), is a primary electrical disorder predisposing affected individuals to sudden cardiac death via the development of ventricular tachycardia and fibrillation (VT/VF). Originally, BrS was linked to mutations in the SCN5A, which encodes for the cardiac Na(+) channel. To date, variants in 19 genes have been implicated in this condition, with 11, 5, 3, and 1 genes affecting the Na(+), K(+), Ca(2+), and funny currents, respectively. Diagnosis of BrS is based on ECG criteria of coved- or saddle-shaped ST segment elevation and/or T-wave inversion with or without drug challenge. Three hypotheses based on abnormal depolarization, abnormal repolarization, and current-load-mismatch have been put forward to explain the electrophysiological mechanisms responsible for BrS. Evidence from computational modeling, pre-clinical, and clinical studies illustrates that molecular abnormalities found in BrS lead to alterations in excitation wavelength (λ), which ultimately elevates arrhythmic risk. A major challenge for clinicians in managing this condition is the difficulty in predicting the subset of patients who will suffer from life-threatening VT/VF. Several repolarization risk markers have been used thus far, but these neglect the contributions of conduction abnormalities in the form of slowing and dispersion. Indices incorporating both repolarization and conduction and based on the concept of λ have recently been proposed. These may have better predictive values than the existing markers.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users 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 67 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 67 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 10 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 13%
Researcher 8 12%
Student > Master 4 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 4%
Other 7 10%
Unknown 26 39%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 27%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 9%
Engineering 3 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 3%
Other 7 10%
Unknown 25 37%
Attention Score in Context

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 12 November 2016.
All research outputs
#13,790,011
of 22,893,031 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#4,862
of 13,689 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#171,312
of 316,298 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#69
of 195 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,893,031 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,689 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 316,298 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 195 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 64% of its contemporaries.