The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users 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.
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 |
Impact of Anesthetic Management on Safety and Outcomes Following Mechanical Thrombectomy for Ischemic Stroke in SWIFT PRIME Cohort
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Neurology, August 2018
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fneur.2018.00702 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Omer F. Eker, Jeffrey L. Saver, Mayank Goyal, Reza Jahan, Elad I. Levy, Raul G. Nogueira, Dileep R. Yavagal, Alain Bonafé, SWIFT PRIME investigators |
| Abstract |
Background and purpose: The optimal anesthetic management of acute ischemic stroke patients during mechanical thrombectomy (MT) remains controversial. In this post-hoc analysis, we investigated the impact of anesthesia type on clinical outcomes in patients included in SWIFT PRIME trial. Methods: Ninety-seven patients treated with MT were included. Patients treated in centers with general anesthesia (GA) policy (n = 32) were compared with those treated in centers with conscious sedation (CS) policy (n = 65). Primary outcomes studied included times to treatment initiation (TTI), rates of successful recanalization (TICI 2b/3), and functional independence (mRS 0-2 at 90 days). Secondary outcomes were adverse events, lowest systolic and diastolic blood pressures (LSBP and LDBP) during MT. Univariate analysis and multivariate regression logistic modeling were conducted. Results: The GA-policy and CS-policy groups presented comparable TTI (94 ± 36 min vs. 102 ± 48 min; p = 0.44), rates of TICI 2b/3 recanalization (22/32 [68.8%] vs. 51/65 [78.5%]; p = 0.32). CS-policy was associated to higher rate of functional independence than GA-policy, but the difference was not significant (43/65 [66.2%] vs. 16/32 [50.0%]; p = 0.18). GA-policy patients had a higher rate of postoperative pneumonia (11/32 [34.4%] vs. 8/65 [12.3%]; p = 0.02) and lower LSBP (110 [30,160] mmHg vs. 119 [77,170] mmHg; p = 0.03) and LDBP (55 (15,75) mmHg vs. 67 [40,121]; p < 0.001). When corrected for differences in baseline characteristics, GA-policy was associated with lower rate of functional independence (OR 0.32; p = 0.05). A 10-point increase in perprocedural LDBP was associated with an increased likelihood of favorable outcome (OR 1.51; p = 0.01). Conclusions: GA-policy for MT presented comparable TTI and rates of successful revascularization to CS-policy. However, GA-policy was associated with lower rates of functional independence and with higher incidence of perprocedural hypotension and postoperative pneumonia. Clinical Trial Registration: URL-http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01657461. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 42 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 6 | 14% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 10% |
| Professor | 3 | 7% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 7 | 17% |
| Unknown | 15 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 15 | 36% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 7% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 7% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 20 | 48% |
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 07 September 2018.
All research outputs
#15,018,183
of 23,102,082 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neurology
#6,208
of 12,015 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#200,533
of 335,220 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neurology
#142
of 297 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,102,082 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,015 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 335,220 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 297 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.