| Title |
Type II endoleaks: challenges and solutions
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Vascular Health and Risk Management, March 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/vhrm.s81275 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Andrew Brown, Greta K Saggu, Matthew J Bown, Robert D Sayers, David A Sidloff |
| Abstract |
Type II endoleaks are the most common endovascular complications of endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR); however, there has been a divided opinion regarding their significance in EVAR. Some advocate a conservative approach unless there is clear evidence of sac expansion, while others maintain early intervention is best to prevent adverse late outcomes such as rupture. There is a lack of level-one evidence in this challenging group of patients, and due to a low event rate of complications, large numbers of patients would be required in well-designed trials to fully understand the natural history of type II endoleak. This review will discuss the imaging, management, and outcome of patients with isolated type II endoleaks following infra-renal EVAR. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 3 | 50% |
| Unknown | 3 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 2 | 33% |
| Scientists | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 81 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 81 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 13 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 11 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 12% |
| Researcher | 8 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 7 | 9% |
| Other | 15 | 19% |
| Unknown | 17 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 43 | 53% |
| Engineering | 7 | 9% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 1% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 1% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 3 | 4% |
| Unknown | 25 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 17 February 2019.
All research outputs
#8,474,037
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Vascular Health and Risk Management
#299
of 804 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#111,747
of 312,595 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Vascular Health and Risk Management
#4
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 804 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% 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 312,595 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 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 71% of its contemporaries.