↓ Skip to main content

Atresia of the Aortic Arch in 4-Year-Old Child: A Clinical Case Study

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Pediatrics, March 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
9 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
Atresia of the Aortic Arch in 4-Year-Old Child: A Clinical Case Study
Published in
Frontiers in Pediatrics, March 2015
DOI 10.3389/fped.2015.00019
Pubmed ID
Authors

Vittoria Nigro Stimato, Dominique Didier, Maurice Beghetti, Cécile Tissot

Abstract

Atresia of the aortic arch is a rare congenital heart defect with a high mortality when associated with other intracardiac defects. Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) provides the exact anatomy of the aortic arch and collateral circulation and is useful to diagnose-associated aortic arch anomalies. This report describes the case of a 4-year-old child with atresia of the aortic arch, referred to our institution with the diagnosis of aortic coarctation and bicuspid aortic valve. On clinical exam, the femoral pulses were not palpable and there was a significant differential blood pressure between the upper and lower limbs. The echocardiography showed a severely stenotic bicuspid aortic valve but was limited for the exact description of the aortic arch. CMR showed absence of lumen continuity between the ascending and descending aorta distal to the left subclavian artery, extending over 5 mm, with the presence of a bend in the arch and diverticulum on either side of the zone of discontinuity, suggesting the diagnosis atresia of the aortic arch rather than coarctation or interruption. The patient benefited from a successful surgical commissurotomy of the aortic valve and reconstruction of the aortic arch with a homograft. The post-operative CMR confirmed the good surgical result. This case emphasizes the utility of CMR to provide good anatomical information to establish the exact diagnosis and the operative strategy.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 9 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 3 33%
Researcher 3 33%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 22%
Student > Bachelor 1 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 89%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 11%
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 20 March 2015.
All research outputs
#18,403,994
of 22,796,179 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Pediatrics
#3,337
of 5,949 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#192,256
of 262,958 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Pediatrics
#18
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,796,179 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 5,949 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% 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 262,958 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.