↓ Skip to main content

Myocardial Involvement After Hospitalization for COVID-19 Complicated by Troponin Elevation: A Prospective, Multicenter, Observational Study

Overview of attention for article published in Circulation, January 2023
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
7 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
167 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
45 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
54 Mendeley
Title
Myocardial Involvement After Hospitalization for COVID-19 Complicated by Troponin Elevation: A Prospective, Multicenter, Observational Study
Published in
Circulation, January 2023
DOI 10.1161/circulationaha.122.060632
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jessica Artico, Hunain Shiwani, James C. Moon, Miroslawa Gorecka, Gerry P. McCann, Giles Roditi, Andrew Morrow, Kenneth Mangion, Elena Lukaschuk, Mayooran Shanmuganathan, Christopher A. Miller, Amedeo Chiribiri, Sanjay K. Prasad, Robert D. Adam, Trisha Singh, Chiara Bucciarelli-Ducci, Dana Dawson, Daniel Knight, Marianna Fontana, Charlotte Manisty, Thomas A. Treibel, Eylem Levelt, Ranjit Arnold, Peter W. Macfarlane, Robin Young, Alex McConnachie, Stefan Neubauer, Stefan K. Piechnik, Rhodri H. Davies, Vanessa M. Ferreira, Marc R. Dweck, Colin Berry, John P. Greenwood

Abstract

Acute myocardial injury in hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has a poor prognosis. Its associations and pathogenesis are unclear. Our aim was to assess the presence, nature, and extent of myocardial damage in hospitalized patients with troponin elevation. Across 25 hospitals in the United Kingdom, 342 patients with COVID-19 and an elevated troponin level (COVID+/troponin+) were enrolled between June 2020 and March 2021 and had a magnetic resonance imaging scan within 28 days of discharge. Two prospective control groups were recruited, comprising 64 patients with COVID-19 and normal troponin levels (COVID+/troponin-) and 113 patients without COVID-19 or elevated troponin level matched by age and cardiovascular comorbidities (COVID-/comorbidity+). Regression modeling was performed to identify predictors of major adverse cardiovascular events at 12 months. Of the 519 included patients, 356 (69%) were men, with a median (interquartile range) age of 61.0 years (53.8, 68.8). The frequency of any heart abnormality, defined as left or right ventricular impairment, scar, or pericardial disease, was 2-fold greater in cases (61% [207/342]) compared with controls (36% [COVID+/troponin-] versus 31% [COVID-/comorbidity+]; P<0.001 for both). More cases than controls had ventricular impairment (17.2% versus 3.1% and 7.1%) or scar (42% versus 7% and 23%; P<0.001 for both). The myocardial injury pattern was different, with cases more likely than controls to have infarction (13% versus 2% and 7%; P<0.01) or microinfarction (9% versus 0% and 1%; P<0.001), but there was no difference in nonischemic scar (13% versus 5% and 14%; P=0.10). Using the Lake Louise magnetic resonance imaging criteria, the prevalence of probable recent myocarditis was 6.7% (23/342) in cases compared with 1.7% (2/113) in controls without COVID-19 (P=0.045). During follow-up, 4 patients died and 34 experienced a subsequent major adverse cardiovascular event (10.2%), which was similar to controls (6.1%; P=0.70). Myocardial scar, but not previous COVID-19 infection or troponin, was an independent predictor of major adverse cardiovascular events (odds ratio, 2.25 [95% CI, 1.12-4.57]; P=0.02). Compared with contemporary controls, patients with COVID-19 and elevated cardiac troponin level have more ventricular impairment and myocardial scar in early convalescence. However, the proportion with myocarditis was low and scar pathogenesis was diverse, including a newly described pattern of microinfarction. URL: https://www.isrctn.com; Unique identifier: 58667920.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 167 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 54 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 15%
Other 5 9%
Researcher 4 7%
Student > Bachelor 3 6%
Student > Master 3 6%
Other 6 11%
Unknown 25 46%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 30%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 7%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 2%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 26 48%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 166. 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 29 May 2024.
All research outputs
#261,470
of 26,491,397 outputs
Outputs from Circulation
#732
of 21,546 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,597
of 492,258 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Circulation
#17
of 147 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,491,397 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 21,546 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 31.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 492,258 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 147 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.