FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2078358375> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2078358375 endingPage "50" @default.
• W2078358375 startingPage "46" @default.
• W2078358375 abstract "Tabled 1KEY TEACHING POINTS•Electrical defects of the Riata lead may become evident only after a maximum shock delivery in the setting of previously unsuspected lead problem based on the routine device checkups.•Externalized conductors may likely indicate a future risk of electrical failure, but may not necessarily precede the electrical defect.•A high-output defibrillation testing is strongly recommended to assess the integrity of the Riata lead at the time of a generator exchange or when electrical defects are highly suspicious. Open table in a new tab The Riata and Riata ST implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) leads, a narrow caliber silicone lead without an outer jacket, have been shown to be prone to structural1Liu J. Rattan R. Adelstein E. et al.Fluoroscopic screening of asymptomatic patients implanted with the recalled Riata lead family.Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2012; 5: 809-814Crossref PubMed Scopus (42) Google Scholar, 2Theuns D.A. Elvan A. de Voogt W. de Cock C.C. van Erven L. Meine M. Prevalence and presentation of externalized conductors and electrical abnormalities in Riata defibrillator leads after fluoroscopic screening: report from the Netherlands Heart Rhythm Association Device Advisory Committee.Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2012; 5: 1059-1063Crossref PubMed Scopus (52) Google Scholar, 3Hayes D. Freedman R. Curtis A.B. Niebauer M. Neal Kay G. Dinerman J. Beau S. Prevalence of externalized conductors in Riata and Riata ST silicone leads: results from the prospective, multicenter Riata Lead Evaluation Study.Heart Rhythm. 2013; 10: 1778-1782Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (35) Google Scholar, 4Abdelhadi R.H. Saba S.F. Ellis C.R. et al.Independent multicenter study of Riata and Riata ST implantable cardioverter-defibrillator leads.Heart Rhythm. 2013; 10: 361-365Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (63) Google Scholar and electrical failure.1Liu J. Rattan R. Adelstein E. et al.Fluoroscopic screening of asymptomatic patients implanted with the recalled Riata lead family.Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2012; 5: 809-814Crossref PubMed Scopus (42) Google Scholar, 2Theuns D.A. Elvan A. de Voogt W. de Cock C.C. van Erven L. Meine M. Prevalence and presentation of externalized conductors and electrical abnormalities in Riata defibrillator leads after fluoroscopic screening: report from the Netherlands Heart Rhythm Association Device Advisory Committee.Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2012; 5: 1059-1063Crossref PubMed Scopus (52) Google Scholar, 3Hayes D. Freedman R. Curtis A.B. Niebauer M. Neal Kay G. Dinerman J. Beau S. Prevalence of externalized conductors in Riata and Riata ST silicone leads: results from the prospective, multicenter Riata Lead Evaluation Study.Heart Rhythm. 2013; 10: 1778-1782Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (35) Google Scholar, 5Hauser R.G. Abdelhadi R. McGriff D. Retel L.K. Deaths caused by the failure of Riata and Riata ST implantable cardioverter-defibrillator leads.Heart Rhythm. 2012; 9: 1227-1235Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (98) Google Scholar, 6Sung R.K. Massie B.M. Varosy P.D. Moore H. Rumsfeld J. Lee B.K. Keung E. Long-term electrical survival analysis of Riata and Riata ST silicone leads: National Veterans Affairs experience.Heart Rhythm. 2012; 9: 1954-1961Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (61) Google Scholar, 7Parkash R. Exner D. Champagne J. et al.Failure rate of the Riata lead under advisory: a report from the CHRS Device Committee.Heart Rhythm. 2013; 10: 692-695Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (42) Google Scholar, 8Cheung J.W. Al-Kazaz M. Thomas G. Liu C.F. Ip J.E. Bender S.R. Siddiqi F.K. Markowitz S.M. Lerman B.B. Mechanisms, predictors, and trends of electrical failure of Riata leads.Heart Rhythm. 2013; 10: 1453-1459Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (28) Google Scholar While much interest has been shown in potentially lethal high-voltage (HV) failures5Hauser R.G. Abdelhadi R. McGriff D. Retel L.K. Deaths caused by the failure of Riata and Riata ST implantable cardioverter-defibrillator leads.Heart Rhythm. 2012; 9: 1227-1235Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (98) Google Scholar, 9Leong D.P. van Erven L. Unrecognized failure of a narrow caliber defibrillation lead: the role of defibrillation threshold testing in identifying an unprotected individual.Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2012; 35: e154-e155Crossref PubMed Scopus (30) Google Scholar, 10Shah P. Singh G. Chandra S. Schuger C.D. Failure to deliver therapy by a Riata lead with internal wire externalization and normal electrical parameters during routine interrogation.J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2013; 24: 94-96Crossref PubMed Scopus (21) Google Scholar caused by electrical short circuits due to a breach in the ethylene tetrafluoroethylene (ETFE) insulation of the defibrillation cables,8Cheung J.W. Al-Kazaz M. Thomas G. Liu C.F. Ip J.E. Bender S.R. Siddiqi F.K. Markowitz S.M. Lerman B.B. Mechanisms, predictors, and trends of electrical failure of Riata leads.Heart Rhythm. 2013; 10: 1453-1459Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (28) Google Scholar the clinical manifestation of Riata/ST lead failures has not been fully elucidated. In this report, we present a case of shock-induced Riata lead pacing failure and discuss clinical approach to the management of Riata/ST leads. A 59-year-old man with dilated cardiomyopathy who had a dual-chamber ICD (ATRAS DR, St Jude Medical, Inc, Sylmar, CA; right ventricular [RV] lead, Riata 1570-65, St Jude Medical) implanted in 2005 visited the emergency department after experiencing 4 successive sets of shocks (1, 6, 6, and 6 shocks, respectively) within an hour in 2013. The surface electrocardiogram showed atrial fibrillation (AF) with RV pacing failure (Figure 1). Externalized conductors (ECs) were not apparent using multidirectional fluoroscopy. Measurement values related to the lead since the implantation had been within the normal ranges and stable up to and including the last evaluation conducted 5 weeks before the event, with the normal ranges as follows: an RV pacing impedance of 400–450 Ω, an RV pacing threshold of 0.25–0.5 V/0.5 ms, an RV sensing threshold of 4.0–6.0 mV, and an HV lead impedance of 52–57 Ω. Device interrogation revealed that all 19 shocks of 36 J were delivered inappropriately owing to AF. The HV lead impedance decreased to 24 Ω for the first shock and was 48, 48, and 45 Ω for the subsequent sets of shocks, respectively. The RV sensing threshold decreased to 2.8 mV. The RV pacing threshold markedly increased to 6.0 V/0.5 ms with an increased impedance of 1500 Ω (Figure 2A). The stored intracardiac electrograms of the first shock episode were unavailable because of the accumulation of data from the subsequent episodes. The second shock episode is shown in Figure 2B. The shock was delivered inappropriately owing to the rapid ventricular response during AF. Noise became apparent on the RV lead after shock delivery. The noises were transiently seen afterward on the intracardiac electrograms of the subsequent episodes.Figure 2A: Trend of pacing lead impedance and capture threshold. The right ventricular pacing lead impedance and pacing threshold had been stable since device implantation, but markedly increased after shock delivery. B: Stored intracardiac electrograms before and just after the second shock delivery. The shock was delivered inappropriately owing to the rapid ventricular response during atrial fibrillation. No noise or nonphysiologic signals were apparent before shock delivery. Noise appeared shortly after shock delivery on the right ventricular electrogram. RA EGM = right atrial electrogram; RV EGM = right ventricular electrogram.View Large Image Figure ViewerDownload (PPT) The patient underwent the implantation of a new defibrillator lead. The affected lead was intact as far as could be visually inspected in the pocket. The RV ring and tip electrode conductors were evaluated individually. The unipolar measurements of the RV ring electrodes were within the normal range, with a pacing impedance of 299 Ω and a pacing threshold of 1.9 V/0.5 ms, whereas those of the RV tip electrodes were abnormal, with a pacing impedance of 1953 Ω and a pacing threshold of 6.5 V/0.5 ms. All connectors of the damaged lead were capped, and the lead was not extracted. A new ICD lead was implanted, and a generator was exchanged. The explanted ICD was bench tested by the manufacturer, and no abnormal findings were obtained. This case demonstrates a shock-induced RV pacing failure, an uncommon manifestation of electrical short circuiting of the ICD lead. It is quite evident that an electrical short circuit occurred during the first shock. However, a short circuit between the HV conductors was unlikely in this case, because the bench test found no abnormality in the internal circuitry of the explanted pulse generator. Since the ATRAS DR ICD was not equipped with an overcurrent detection system, an electrical short circuit between the HV systems should have damaged the internal circuitry of the pulse generator. RV pacing failure seen shortly after shock delivery was caused by the failure of the RV tip conductor that was centrally located in the lead. Thus, it was most likely that a short circuit occurred between the RV tip conductor and one of the following HV systems: the RV coil conductor, the superior vena cava (SVC) coil conductor, or the ICD can (Figure 3). The 3 hypotheses regarding how RV pacing failure developed owing to a short circuit are described below. Hypothesis 1 is that an electrical short circuit occurred between the RV tip conductor and the RV coil conductor (Figure 3A). The RV tip electrode functioned as an anode during shock delivery. The electrical current ran from the RV tip electrode to the SVC coil as well as to the ICD can, making a circuit parallel to those between the RV coil and the SVC coil/ICD can. As a result, the shock impedance decreased to 24 Ω. The myocardium surrounding the RV tip electrode was ablated by the shock current, which increased the pacing impedance and pacing threshold. Furthermore, because of the impedance increase in the myocardium surrounding the RV tip electrode caused by the first shock, the shock impedances of the subsequent shocks were increased to the near-normal range. Hypothesis 2 is that an electrical short circuit occurred between the RV tip conductor and the SVC coil conductor (Figure 3B). In this setting, the RV tip electrode functioned as a cathode. The current ran from the RV coil to the RV tip electrode. The circuit was parallel to that between the RV coil and the SVC coil and to that between the RV coil and the ICD can. The subsequent result was the same as in Hypothesis 1. Hypothesis 3 is that an electrical short circuit occurred between the RV tip conductor and the ICD can (Figure 3C). The RV tip electrode functioned as a cathode, with the same result as in Hypothesis 2. The Riata lead consists of a centrally located RV tip conductor coil and 3 surrounding pairs of conductor cables: the RV HV defibrillation conductor cables, the SVC HV defibrillation conductor cables, and the ring electrode conductor cables. The central RV tip conductor coil is encased in a tube of polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE), and each of the 3 pairs of conductor cables is extruded with ETFE. When the lead structure is considered, Hypothesis 3 becomes less likely. Theoretically, it seems impossible to selectively damage the central RV tip conductor without the other surrounding conductors being affected by can abrasion. In addition, the lead damage was not obvious in the pocket. Thus, in this case, breaks in the PTFE insulation and the ETFE insulation of either the RV or the SVC coil conductor were most likely responsible for the short circuiting. Riata and Riata ST ICD leads are prone to a unique insulation failure with inside-out abrasion with ECs.1Liu J. Rattan R. Adelstein E. et al.Fluoroscopic screening of asymptomatic patients implanted with the recalled Riata lead family.Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2012; 5: 809-814Crossref PubMed Scopus (42) Google Scholar, 2Theuns D.A. Elvan A. de Voogt W. de Cock C.C. van Erven L. Meine M. Prevalence and presentation of externalized conductors and electrical abnormalities in Riata defibrillator leads after fluoroscopic screening: report from the Netherlands Heart Rhythm Association Device Advisory Committee.Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2012; 5: 1059-1063Crossref PubMed Scopus (52) Google Scholar, 3Hayes D. Freedman R. Curtis A.B. Niebauer M. Neal Kay G. Dinerman J. Beau S. Prevalence of externalized conductors in Riata and Riata ST silicone leads: results from the prospective, multicenter Riata Lead Evaluation Study.Heart Rhythm. 2013; 10: 1778-1782Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (35) Google Scholar, 4Abdelhadi R.H. Saba S.F. Ellis C.R. et al.Independent multicenter study of Riata and Riata ST implantable cardioverter-defibrillator leads.Heart Rhythm. 2013; 10: 361-365Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (63) Google Scholar The prevalence of ECs ranges from 14% to 25% at a dwell time of approximately 5 years.1Liu J. Rattan R. Adelstein E. et al.Fluoroscopic screening of asymptomatic patients implanted with the recalled Riata lead family.Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2012; 5: 809-814Crossref PubMed Scopus (42) Google Scholar, 2Theuns D.A. Elvan A. de Voogt W. de Cock C.C. van Erven L. Meine M. Prevalence and presentation of externalized conductors and electrical abnormalities in Riata defibrillator leads after fluoroscopic screening: report from the Netherlands Heart Rhythm Association Device Advisory Committee.Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2012; 5: 1059-1063Crossref PubMed Scopus (52) Google Scholar, 3Hayes D. Freedman R. Curtis A.B. Niebauer M. Neal Kay G. Dinerman J. Beau S. Prevalence of externalized conductors in Riata and Riata ST silicone leads: results from the prospective, multicenter Riata Lead Evaluation Study.Heart Rhythm. 2013; 10: 1778-1782Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (35) Google Scholar, 4Abdelhadi R.H. Saba S.F. Ellis C.R. et al.Independent multicenter study of Riata and Riata ST implantable cardioverter-defibrillator leads.Heart Rhythm. 2013; 10: 361-365Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (63) Google Scholar Most leads with ECs seem to be electrically intact with PTFE/ETFE insulation of each cable, and the overall incidence of electrical abnormalities ranges from 1.3% to 6.7% (Table 1).1Liu J. Rattan R. Adelstein E. et al.Fluoroscopic screening of asymptomatic patients implanted with the recalled Riata lead family.Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2012; 5: 809-814Crossref PubMed Scopus (42) Google Scholar, 2Theuns D.A. Elvan A. de Voogt W. de Cock C.C. van Erven L. Meine M. Prevalence and presentation of externalized conductors and electrical abnormalities in Riata defibrillator leads after fluoroscopic screening: report from the Netherlands Heart Rhythm Association Device Advisory Committee.Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2012; 5: 1059-1063Crossref PubMed Scopus (52) Google Scholar, 3Hayes D. Freedman R. Curtis A.B. Niebauer M. Neal Kay G. Dinerman J. Beau S. Prevalence of externalized conductors in Riata and Riata ST silicone leads: results from the prospective, multicenter Riata Lead Evaluation Study.Heart Rhythm. 2013; 10: 1778-1782Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (35) Google Scholar, 6Sung R.K. Massie B.M. Varosy P.D. Moore H. Rumsfeld J. Lee B.K. Keung E. Long-term electrical survival analysis of Riata and Riata ST silicone leads: National Veterans Affairs experience.Heart Rhythm. 2012; 9: 1954-1961Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (61) Google Scholar, 7Parkash R. Exner D. Champagne J. et al.Failure rate of the Riata lead under advisory: a report from the CHRS Device Committee.Heart Rhythm. 2013; 10: 692-695Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (42) Google Scholar, 8Cheung J.W. Al-Kazaz M. Thomas G. Liu C.F. Ip J.E. Bender S.R. Siddiqi F.K. Markowitz S.M. Lerman B.B. Mechanisms, predictors, and trends of electrical failure of Riata leads.Heart Rhythm. 2013; 10: 1453-1459Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (28) Google Scholar The pattern of electrical failure is diverse, including nonphysiologic noise and decrease or increase in pace/sense conductor impedance or HV impedance. Sung et al6Sung R.K. Massie B.M. Varosy P.D. Moore H. Rumsfeld J. Lee B.K. Keung E. Long-term electrical survival analysis of Riata and Riata ST silicone leads: National Veterans Affairs experience.Heart Rhythm. 2012; 9: 1954-1961Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (61) Google Scholar reported that 14 of 47 failed leads resulted in inappropriate shocks. Among them, an increase in pace/sense conductor impedance and an increase in capture threshold were seen in 1 patient, respectively.6Sung R.K. Massie B.M. Varosy P.D. Moore H. Rumsfeld J. Lee B.K. Keung E. Long-term electrical survival analysis of Riata and Riata ST silicone leads: National Veterans Affairs experience.Heart Rhythm. 2012; 9: 1954-1961Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (61) Google Scholar Although they did not mention the clinical manifestation of the lead failures in detail, these 2 leads may have had the pattern of electrical failure similar to that of the present case. It is debatable whether leads with ECs are more likely to fail electrically (Table 1).2Theuns D.A. Elvan A. de Voogt W. de Cock C.C. van Erven L. Meine M. Prevalence and presentation of externalized conductors and electrical abnormalities in Riata defibrillator leads after fluoroscopic screening: report from the Netherlands Heart Rhythm Association Device Advisory Committee.Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2012; 5: 1059-1063Crossref PubMed Scopus (52) Google Scholar, 3Hayes D. Freedman R. Curtis A.B. Niebauer M. Neal Kay G. Dinerman J. Beau S. Prevalence of externalized conductors in Riata and Riata ST silicone leads: results from the prospective, multicenter Riata Lead Evaluation Study.Heart Rhythm. 2013; 10: 1778-1782Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (35) Google Scholar, 4Abdelhadi R.H. Saba S.F. Ellis C.R. et al.Independent multicenter study of Riata and Riata ST implantable cardioverter-defibrillator leads.Heart Rhythm. 2013; 10: 361-365Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (63) Google Scholar, 8Cheung J.W. Al-Kazaz M. Thomas G. Liu C.F. Ip J.E. Bender S.R. Siddiqi F.K. Markowitz S.M. Lerman B.B. Mechanisms, predictors, and trends of electrical failure of Riata leads.Heart Rhythm. 2013; 10: 1453-1459Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (28) Google Scholar In this regard, a recent longitudinal follow-up study has demonstrated that ECs develop at a rate of 3.7 per 100 person-years and that electrical abnormalities will newly occur with a 4.4 times higher rate in patients with baseline ECs than in those without ECs.11Larsen J.M. Nielsen J.C. Johansen J.B. Haarbo J. Petersen H.H. Thøgersen A.M. Hjortshøj S.P. Prospective nationwide fluoroscopic and electrical longitudinal follow-up of recalled Riata defibrillator leads in Denmark.Heart Rhythm. 2014; 11: 2141-2147Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (12) Google Scholar Another longitudinal study has shown an electrical failure rate of 6.4%/y in the externalized lead.12Liu J. Qin D. Rattan R. Bazaz R. Adelstein E. Jain S. Saba S. Longitudinal follow-up of externalized Riata leads.Am J Cardiol. 2013; 112: 1616-1618Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (12) Google Scholar The time-dependent phenomenon of ECs and link to new electrical abnormalities emphasize that fluoroscopic screening of ECs will provide useful information in the management of Riata/ST leads.Table 1Incidence of externalized conductors and electrical abnormalities in Riata/ST ICD leadsStudy group, yearLead modelnECDwell time (y)EAEC-EA relationLiu, 2012Total24553 (21.6%)5.7 ± 1.5––Riata18746 (24.6%)–––Riata ST587 (12.1%)–––Theuns, 2012Total1029147 (14.3%)5.0 (median)47 (4.6%)PositiveRiata482103 (21.4%)6.0 (median)––Riata ST54744 (8.0%)4.3 (median)––Sung, 2012Total1403––47 (3.3%), 0.67%/y–Riata877––30 (3.4%), 0.61%/y–Riata ST526––17 (3.2%), 0.81%/y–Hayes, 2013Total776149 (19.2%)4.8 ± 0.910 (1.3%)NegativeRiata517125 (24.2%)4.8 ± 0.96 (1.2%)NegativeRiata ST25924 (9.3%)4.8 ± 0.94 (1.5%)NegativeParkash, 2013Total4358–5.0 (median)201 (4.6%)–Riata2847––147 (5.2%)–Riata ST1,412––47 (3.3%)–Unknown99––7 (7%)–Abdelhadi, 2013Total108127/110 (24.5%)*Not all patients underwent fluoroscopic evaluation of externalized conductors.–67 (6.2%)PositiveRiata77426/81 (32%)*Not all patients underwent fluoroscopic evaluation of externalized conductors.4.2 ± 2.462 (8.0%)Riata ST3071/29 (3.4%)*Not all patients underwent fluoroscopic evaluation of externalized conductors.3.3 ± 1.75 (1.6%)Cheung, 2013Total314–4.1 (median)21 (6.7%)PositiveEA = electrical abnormality; EC = externalized conductor; ICD = implantable cardioverter-defibrillator. Not all patients underwent fluoroscopic evaluation of externalized conductors. Open table in a new tab EA = electrical abnormality; EC = externalized conductor; ICD = implantable cardioverter-defibrillator. It should be noted that neither the EC nor electrical failure had been detected by the routine device checkups before the true shock delivery occurred in the present case. There is no definite explanation for this. However, it is conceivable that the insulation was barely intact, although there should have been partial abrasion of the ETFE and/or PTFE coatings before the high-energy shock current caused a breakdown of the coatings. Another possible explanation is that the delivery of a low current during the HV impedance measurement may not have been enough to reveal a small short circuit that became apparent only through the delivery of a maximum shock. Two previous case reports9Leong D.P. van Erven L. Unrecognized failure of a narrow caliber defibrillation lead: the role of defibrillation threshold testing in identifying an unprotected individual.Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2012; 35: e154-e155Crossref PubMed Scopus (30) Google Scholar, 10Shah P. Singh G. Chandra S. Schuger C.D. Failure to deliver therapy by a Riata lead with internal wire externalization and normal electrical parameters during routine interrogation.J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2013; 24: 94-96Crossref PubMed Scopus (21) Google Scholar have described a similar phenomenon in Riata leads, underscoring the concept that a lead problem may become evident only after maximum shock delivery. We should keep in mind that device interrogation, fluoroscopy, and low-voltage shocks may not be able to detect electrical defects even when present. A high-output defibrillation testing is strongly recommended to assess the lead integrity at the time of a generator exchange or when electrical defects are highly suspicious." @default.
• W2078358375 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2078358375 creator A5012809776 @default.
• W2078358375 creator A5021054553 @default.
• W2078358375 creator A5041731411 @default.
• W2078358375 creator A5057162114 @default.
• W2078358375 creator A5064987751 @default.
• W2078358375 creator A5076148360 @default.
• W2078358375 date "2015-03-01" @default.
• W2078358375 modified "2023-09-27" @default.
• W2078358375 title "Shock-induced right ventricular pacing failure caused by a short circuit: Uncommon but life-threatening complication of the Riata lead" @default.
• W2078358375 cites W1919156678 @default.
• W2078358375 cites W1971398977 @default.
• W2078358375 cites W2008420729 @default.
• W2078358375 cites W2020931927 @default.
• W2078358375 cites W2055095051 @default.
• W2078358375 cites W2069924453 @default.
• W2078358375 cites W2071431129 @default.
• W2078358375 cites W2083965329 @default.
• W2078358375 cites W2116105749 @default.
• W2078358375 cites W2144600479 @default.
• W2078358375 cites W2145199423 @default.
• W2078358375 cites W2145236566 @default.
• W2078358375 doi "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrcr.2014.11.005" @default.
• W2078358375 hasPubMedCentralId "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/5418533" @default.
• W2078358375 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28491509" @default.
• W2078358375 hasPublicationYear "2015" @default.
• W2078358375 type Work @default.
• W2078358375 sameAs 2078358375 @default.
• W2078358375 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W2078358375 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2078358375 hasAuthorship W2078358375A5012809776 @default.
• W2078358375 hasAuthorship W2078358375A5021054553 @default.
• W2078358375 hasAuthorship W2078358375A5041731411 @default.
• W2078358375 hasAuthorship W2078358375A5057162114 @default.
• W2078358375 hasAuthorship W2078358375A5064987751 @default.
• W2078358375 hasAuthorship W2078358375A5076148360 @default.
• W2078358375 hasBestOaLocation W20783583751 @default.
• W2078358375 hasConcept C114793014 @default.
• W2078358375 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W2078358375 hasConcept C127313418 @default.
• W2078358375 hasConcept C164705383 @default.
• W2078358375 hasConcept C2777093003 @default.
• W2078358375 hasConcept C2781300812 @default.
• W2078358375 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2078358375 hasConcept C81182388 @default.
• W2078358375 hasConceptScore W2078358375C114793014 @default.
• W2078358375 hasConceptScore W2078358375C126322002 @default.
• W2078358375 hasConceptScore W2078358375C127313418 @default.
• W2078358375 hasConceptScore W2078358375C164705383 @default.
• W2078358375 hasConceptScore W2078358375C2777093003 @default.
• W2078358375 hasConceptScore W2078358375C2781300812 @default.
• W2078358375 hasConceptScore W2078358375C71924100 @default.
• W2078358375 hasConceptScore W2078358375C81182388 @default.
• W2078358375 hasIssue "2" @default.
• W2078358375 hasLocation W20783583751 @default.
• W2078358375 hasLocation W20783583752 @default.
• W2078358375 hasLocation W20783583753 @default.
• W2078358375 hasLocation W20783583754 @default.
• W2078358375 hasOpenAccess W2078358375 @default.
• W2078358375 hasPrimaryLocation W20783583751 @default.
• W2078358375 hasRelatedWork W2026546135 @default.
• W2078358375 hasRelatedWork W2049397185 @default.
• W2078358375 hasRelatedWork W2066758018 @default.
• W2078358375 hasRelatedWork W2159512267 @default.
• W2078358375 hasRelatedWork W2304633692 @default.
• W2078358375 hasRelatedWork W2369768841 @default.
• W2078358375 hasRelatedWork W2373422445 @default.
• W2078358375 hasRelatedWork W2387537223 @default.
• W2078358375 hasRelatedWork W2387894711 @default.
• W2078358375 hasRelatedWork W2399063111 @default.
• W2078358375 hasVolume "1" @default.
• W2078358375 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2078358375 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2078358375 magId "2078358375" @default.
• W2078358375 workType "article" @default.