↓ Skip to main content

Prospective Evaluation of Sleep Apnea as Manifestation of Heart Failure in Children

Overview of attention for article published in Pediatric Cardiology, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
19 Mendeley
Title
Prospective Evaluation of Sleep Apnea as Manifestation of Heart Failure in Children
Published in
Pediatric Cardiology, October 2015
DOI 10.1007/s00246-015-1269-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Susanna L. den Boer, Koen F. M. Joosten, Sandra van den Berg, Ad P. C. M. Backx, Ronald B. Tanke, Gideon J. du Marchie Sarvaas, Willem A. Helbing, Lukas A. J. Rammeloo, Arend D. J. ten Harkel, Gabriëlle G. van Iperen, Michiel Dalinghaus

Abstract

In adults with heart failure, central sleep apnea (CSA), often manifested as Cheyne-Stokes respiration, is common, and has been associated with adverse outcome. Heart failure in children is commonly caused by dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM). It is unknown whether children with heart failure secondary to DCM have CSA, and whether CSA is related to the severity of heart failure. In this prospective observational study, 37 patients (<18 year) with heart failure secondary to DCM were included. They underwent polysomnography, clinical and laboratory evaluation and echocardiographic assessment. After a median follow-up time of 2 years, eight patients underwent heart transplantation. CSA (apnea-hypopnea index [AHI] ≥1) was found in 19 % of the patients. AHI ranged from 1.2 to 4.5/h. The occurrence of CSA was not related to the severity of heart failure. Three older patients showed a breathing pattern mimicking Cheyne-Stokes respiration, two of whom required heart transplantation. CSA was found in 19 % of the children with heart failure secondary to DCM. No relation was found with the severity of heart failure. In a small subset of children with severe DCM, a pattern mimicking Cheyne-Stokes respiration was registered.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 5%
Unknown 18 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 5 26%
Student > Bachelor 4 21%
Unspecified 2 11%
Student > Master 2 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 11%
Other 4 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 63%
Unspecified 5 26%
Chemistry 1 5%
Psychology 1 5%

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 18 October 2015.
All research outputs
#10,833,138
of 12,219,921 outputs
Outputs from Pediatric Cardiology
#584
of 1,057 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#210,259
of 255,993 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pediatric Cardiology
#21
of 51 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,219,921 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,057 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.4. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 255,993 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 51 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.