↓ Skip to main content

Brief cardiovascular imaging with pocket-size ultrasound devices improves the accuracy of the initial assessment of suspected pulmonary embolism

Overview of attention for article published in The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#34 of 2,012)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (85th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
23 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
25 Mendeley
Title
Brief cardiovascular imaging with pocket-size ultrasound devices improves the accuracy of the initial assessment of suspected pulmonary embolism
Published in
The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging, May 2018
DOI 10.1007/s10554-018-1382-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dominika Filipiak-Strzecka, Jarosław D. Kasprzak, Piotr Lipiec

Abstract

Pulmonary embolism onset is frequently neglected due to the non-specific character of its symptoms. Pocket-size imaging devices (PSID) present an opportunity to implement imaging diagnostics into conventional physical examination. The aim of this study was to test the hypothesis that supplementation of the initial bedside assessment of patients with suspected pulmonary embolism (PE) with four-point compression venous ultrasonography (CUS) and right ventricular size assessment with the use of PSID equipped with dual probe could positively influence the accuracy of clinical predictions. A single-centre, prospective analysis was conducted on 100 patients (47 men, mean age 68 ± 13 years) with suspected PE. Clinical assessment on the basis of Wells and revised Geneva score and physical examination were supplemented with CUS and RV measurements by PSID. The mean time of PSID scanning was 4.9 ± 0.8 min and was universally accepted by the patients. Fifteen patients had deep venous thrombosis and RV enlargement was observed in 59 patients. PE was confirmed in 24 patients. If the both CUS was positive and RV enlarged, the specificity was 100% and sensitivity 54%, ROC AUC 0.771 [95% CI 0.68-0.85]. The Wells rule within our study population had the specificity of 86% and sensitivity of 67%, ROC AUC 0.776 (95% CI 0.681-0.853, p < 0.0001). Similar values calculated for the revised Geneva score were as follows: specificity 58% and sensitivity 63%, ROC AUC 0.664 (95% CI 0.563-0.756, p = 0.0104). Supplementing the revised Geneva score with additional criteria of CUS result and RV measurement resulted in significant improvement of diagnostic accuracy. The difference between ROC AUCs was 0.199 (95% Cl 0.0893-0.308, p = 0.0004). Similar modification of Wells score increased ROC AUC by 0.133 (95% CI 0.0443-0.223, p = 0.0034). Despite the well-acknowledged role of the PE clinical risk assessment scores the diagnostic process may benefit from the addition of basic bedside ultrasonographic techniques.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 23 X users 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 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 25 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 24%
Student > Bachelor 5 20%
Other 3 12%
Student > Postgraduate 2 8%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 1 4%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 6 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 44%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 12%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 4%
Social Sciences 1 4%
Engineering 1 4%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 8 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 03 May 2019.
All research outputs
#2,386,395
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging
#34
of 2,012 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#48,208
of 344,275 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging
#1
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,012 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 344,275 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.