↓ Skip to main content

Mechanotransduction in Coronary Vein Graft Disease

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
21 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
Mechanotransduction in Coronary Vein Graft Disease
Published in
Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine, March 2018
DOI 10.3389/fcvm.2018.00020
Pubmed ID
Authors

Matthijs Steven Ruiter, Maurizio Pesce

Abstract

Autologous saphenous veins are the most commonly used conduits in revascularization of the ischemic heart by coronary artery bypass graft surgery, but are subject to vein graft failure. The current mini review aims to provide an overview of the role of mechanotransduction signalling underlying vein graft failure to further our understanding of the disease progression and to improve future clinical treatment. Firstly, limitation of damage during vein harvest and engraftment can improve outcome. In addition, cell cycle inhibition, stimulation of Nur77 and external grafting could form interesting therapeutic options. Moreover, the Hippo pathway, with the YAP/TAZ complex as the main effector, is emerging as an important node controlling conversion of mechanical signals into cellular responses. This includes endothelial cell inflammation, smooth muscle cell proliferation/migration, and monocyte attachment/infiltration. The combined effects of expression levels and nuclear/cytoplasmic translocation make YAP/TAZ interesting novel targets in the prevention and treatment of vein graft disease. Pharmacological, molecular and/or mechanical conditioning of saphenous vein segments between harvest and grafting may potentiate targeted and specific treatment to improve long-term outcome.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

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.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 21 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 24%
Student > Master 3 14%
Researcher 3 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 5%
Student > Bachelor 1 5%
Other 4 19%
Unknown 4 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 19%
Engineering 3 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 10%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 1 5%
Other 3 14%
Unknown 4 19%
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 14 March 2018.
All research outputs
#18,590,133
of 23,026,672 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine
#3,251
of 6,934 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#259,444
of 333,763 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine
#32
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,026,672 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,934 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. 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 333,763 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 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.