↓ Skip to main content

Magnetic guidance versus manual control: comparison of radiofrequency lesion dimensions and evaluation of the effect of heart wall motion in a myocardial phantom

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Interventional Cardiac Electrophysiology, June 2015
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 (#18 of 437)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
17 Mendeley
Title
Magnetic guidance versus manual control: comparison of radiofrequency lesion dimensions and evaluation of the effect of heart wall motion in a myocardial phantom
Published in
Journal of Interventional Cardiac Electrophysiology, June 2015
DOI 10.1007/s10840-015-0023-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Abhishek Bhaskaran, M. A. Barry, Sara I. Al Raisi, William Chik, Doan Trang Nguyen, Jim Pouliopoulos, Chrishan Nalliah, Roger Hendricks, Stuart Thomas, Alistair L McEwan, Pramesh Kovoor, Aravinda Thiagalingam

Abstract

Magnetic navigation system (MNS) ablation was suspected to be less effective and unstable in highly mobile cardiac regions compared to radiofrequency (RF) ablations with manual control (MC). The aim of the study was to compare the (1) lesion size and (2) stability of MNS versus MC during irrigated RF ablation with and without simulated mechanical heart wall motion. In a previously validated myocardial phantom, the performance of Navistar RMT Thermocool catheter (Biosense Webster, CA, USA) guided with MNS was compared to manually controlled Navistar irrigated Thermocool catheter (Biosense Webster, CA, USA). The lesion dimensions were compared with the catheter in inferior and superior orientation, with and without 6-mm simulated wall motion. All ablations were performed with 40 W power and 30 ml/ min irrigation for 60 s. A total of 60 ablations were performed. The mean lesion volumes with MNS and MC were 57.5 ± 7.1 and 58.1 ± 7.1 mm(3), respectively, in the inferior catheter orientation (n = 23, p = 0.6), 62.8 ± 9.9 and 64.6 ± 7.6 mm(3), respectively, in the superior catheter orientation (n = 16, p = 0.9). With 6-mm simulated wall motion, the mean lesion volumes with MNS and MC were 60.2 ± 2.7 and 42.8 ± 8.4 mm(3), respectively, in the inferior catheter orientation (n = 11, p = <0.01*), 74.1 ± 5.8 and 54.2 ± 3.7 mm(3), respectively, in the superior catheter orientation (n = 10, p = <0.01*). During 6-mm simulated wall motion, the MC catheter and MNS catheter moved 5.2 ± 0.1 and 0 mm, respectively, in inferior orientation and 5.5 ± 0.1 and 0 mm, respectively, in the superior orientation on the ablation surface. The lesion dimensions were larger with MNS compared to MC in the presence of simulated wall motion, consistent with greater catheter stability. However, similar lesion dimensions were observed in the stationary model.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 6%
Unknown 16 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 29%
Researcher 4 24%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 18%
Student > Postgraduate 2 12%
Student > Bachelor 2 12%
Other 1 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 41%
Engineering 6 35%
Linguistics 1 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 6%
Chemistry 1 6%
Other 1 6%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 27 August 2015.
All research outputs
#1,058,799
of 12,317,848 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Interventional Cardiac Electrophysiology
#18
of 437 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#27,892
of 241,421 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Interventional Cardiac Electrophysiology
#1
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,317,848 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 437 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 241,421 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 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.