| Title |
Robotic magnetic navigation for ablation of human arrhythmias
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Medical Devices : Evidence and Research, September 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/mder.s96167 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Antoine Da Costa, Jean Baptiste Guichard, Cécile Roméyer-Bouchard, Antoine Gerbay, Karl Isaaz |
| Abstract |
Radiofrequency treatment represents the first choice of treatment for arrhythmias, in particular complex arrhythmias and especially atrial fibrillation, due to the greater benefit/risk ratio compared to antiarrhythmic drugs. However, complex arrhythmias such as atrial fibrillation require long procedures with additional risks such as X-ray exposure or serious complications such as tamponade. Given this context, the treatment of arrhythmias using robotic magnetic navigation entails a technique well suited to complex arrhythmias on account of its efficacy, reliability, significant reduction in X-ray exposure for both patient and operator, as well as a very low risk of perforation. As ongoing developments will likely improve results and procedure times, this technology will become one of the most modern technologies for treating arrhythmias. Based on the literature, this review summarizes the advantages and limitations of robotic magnetic navigation for ablation of human arrhythmias. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 40% |
| Unknown | 3 | 60% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 40% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 20% |
| Scientists | 1 | 20% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 28 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 11% |
| Researcher | 3 | 11% |
| Professor | 2 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 4 | 14% |
| Unknown | 11 | 39% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Engineering | 8 | 29% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 21% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 4% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 1 | 4% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 11 | 39% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 11 March 2023.
All research outputs
#5,189,339
of 25,457,858 outputs
Outputs from Medical Devices : Evidence and Research
#65
of 314 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#81,667
of 348,542 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Medical Devices : Evidence and Research
#3
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,858 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 314 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 348,542 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 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.