↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Current perspectives in percutaneous atrial septal defect closure devices

Overview of attention for article published in Medical Devices : Evidence and Research, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#29 of 112)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
24 Mendeley
Title
Current perspectives in percutaneous atrial septal defect closure devices
Published in
Medical Devices : Evidence and Research, July 2015
DOI 10.2147/mder.s49368
Pubmed ID
Authors

Naylin Bissessor

Abstract

In the last decade, percutaneous atrial septal defect (ASD) closure has become the treatment of choice in most clinical presentations of ASD. Percutaneous ASD closure has established procedural safety through operator experience and improved device structure and deliverability. There have also been advances in diagnostic capabilities. Devices have evolved from large bulky meshes to repositionable, minimal residual mesh content that easily endothelializes and conforms well to surrounding structures. Biodegradable technology has been introduced and will be closely watched as a future option. The evolution of ASD closure device usage in the last four decades incorporates development that minimizes a wide range of serious side effects that have been reported over the years. Complications reported in the literature include thrombus formation, air embolization, device embolization, erosions, residual shunts, and nickel hypersensitivity. Modern devices have intermediate to long term data with outcomes that have been favorable. Devices are available in multiple sizes with improved delivery mechanisms to recapture, reposition, and safely close simple and complex ASDs amenable to percutaneous closure. In this review, commonly used devices and deployment procedures are discussed together with a look at devices that show promise for the future.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Chile 1 4%
Unknown 23 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 29%
Other 4 17%
Unspecified 3 13%
Student > Postgraduate 3 13%
Student > Bachelor 2 8%
Other 5 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 67%
Unspecified 4 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 4%
Neuroscience 1 4%
Environmental Science 1 4%
Other 1 4%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 16 July 2015.
All research outputs
#2,474,912
of 5,361,876 outputs
Outputs from Medical Devices : Evidence and Research
#29
of 112 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#84,323
of 184,849 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Medical Devices : Evidence and Research
#2
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 5,361,876 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 51st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 112 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 184,849 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.