↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Lung perfusion and emphysema distribution affect the outcome of endobronchial valve therapy

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
30 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
28 Mendeley
Title
Lung perfusion and emphysema distribution affect the outcome of endobronchial valve therapy
Published in
International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, June 2016
DOI 10.2147/copd.s101003
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christian Thomsen, Dorothea Theilig, Dominik Herzog, Alexander Poellinger, Felix Doellinger, Nils Schreiter, Vera Schreiter, Dirk Schürmann, Bettina Temmesfeld-Wollbrueck, Stefan Hippenstiel, Norbert Suttorp, Ralf-Harto Hubner

Abstract

The exclusion of collateral ventilation (CV) and other factors affect the clinical success of endoscopic lung volume reduction (ELVR). However, despite its benefits, the outcome of ELVR remains difficult to predict. We investigated whether clinical success could be predicted by emphysema distribution assessed by computed tomography scan and baseline perfusion assessed by perfusion scintigraphy. Data from 57 patients with no CV in the target lobe (TL) were retrospectively analyzed after ELVR with valves. Pulmonary function tests (PFT), St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), and 6-minute walk tests (6MWT) were performed on patients at baseline. The sample was grouped into high and low levels at the median of TL perfusion, ipsilateral nontarget lobe (INL) perfusion, and heterogeneity index (HI). These groups were analyzed for association with changes in outcome parameters from baseline to 3 months follow-up. Compared to baseline, patients showed significant improvements in PFT, SGRQ, and 6MWT (all P≤0.001). TL perfusion was not associated with changes in the outcome. High INL perfusion was significantly associated with increases in 6MWT (P=0.014), and high HI was associated with increases in forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), (P=0.012). Likewise, there were significant correlations for INL perfusion and improvement of 6MWT (r=0.35, P=0.03) and for HI and improvement in FEV1 (r=0.45, P=0.001). This study reveals new attributes that associate with positive outcomes for patient selection prior to ELVR. Patients with high perfusions in INL demonstrated greater improvements in 6MWT, while patients with high HI were more likely to respond in FEV1.

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 28 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 7%
Student > Bachelor 2 7%
Other 2 7%
Other 7 25%
Unknown 5 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 43%
Unspecified 2 7%
Psychology 2 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 4%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 8 29%
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 10 June 2016.
All research outputs
#20,656,820
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
#2,078
of 2,577 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#269,925
of 353,662 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
#70
of 83 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,577 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% 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 353,662 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 83 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.