↓ Skip to main content

Trans-septal course of anomalous left main coronary artery originating from single right coronary ostium presenting with atrial fibrillation in a severely obese patient: a case report

Overview of attention for article published in The Egyptian Heart Journal, September 2020
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
7 Mendeley
Title
Trans-septal course of anomalous left main coronary artery originating from single right coronary ostium presenting with atrial fibrillation in a severely obese patient: a case report
Published in
The Egyptian Heart Journal, September 2020
DOI 10.1186/s43044-020-00093-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Armando Ugo Cavallo, Emanuele Muscogiuri, Marco Forcina, Antonio Colombo, Flavio Fiore, Massimiliano Sperandio

Abstract

To present a case of anomalous origin of the left coronary artery evaluated with invasive coronary angiography (ICA) and ECG-gated coronary computed tomography (CCT). A patient (55 years old, male) with a past medical history of respiratory failure and atrial fibrillation underwent ICA to rule out coronary artery disease. Subsequently, the patient underwent ECG-gated CCT to evaluate a suspected anomalous aortic origin of the left coronary artery, since the interventional cardiologist was not able to properly identify the left coronary artery and its distal branches. CCT showed left coronary artery originating from the right coronary Valsalva sinus, coursing within the interventricular septum and emerging at the middle segment of the interventricular sulcus, where the left anterior descending and circumflex arteries originated. The case we presented highlights the value of ECG-gated CCT in the evaluation of coronary anomaly anatomy and thus risk stratification derived by proper coronary anatomy assessment. Although ICA was not helpful in the diagnosis, it also has a pivotal role regarding the therapeutic management of this condition.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 7 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 3 43%
Other 1 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 14%
Unknown 2 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 3 43%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 14%
Engineering 1 14%
Unknown 2 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 22 September 2020.
All research outputs
#17,297,846
of 25,387,668 outputs
Outputs from The Egyptian Heart Journal
#77
of 183 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#273,559
of 429,848 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The Egyptian Heart Journal
#3
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,387,668 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 183 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 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 429,848 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.