| Title |
Cardiac CT Angiography (CCTA) predicts left atrial appendage occluder device size and procedure outcome
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging, January 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10554-016-1050-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Orly Goitein, Noam Fink, Ilan Hay, Elio Di Segni, Victor Guetta, David Goitein, Yafim Brodov, Eli Konen, Michael Glikson |
| Abstract |
To investigate the role of cardiac CT angiography (CCTA) in predicting optimal left atrial appendage (LAA) occluder size and procedure outcome. Thirty-six patients underwent pre-procedural CCTA. CCTA and TEE LAA orifice diameters and perimeters were compared with the implanted device size. CCTA 3D configuration was correlated with procedure outcome. Watchman™ device (N = 18): diameters were 21 ± 4, 26 ± 5 and 25 ± 3 mm for TEE, CCTA and inserted device, respectively. Average perimeters were 61 ± 10, 74 ± 8 and 78 ± 11 mm for TEE, CCTA and inserted device, respectively. Better agreement with the device size was found for CCTA compared to TEE (Bland-Altman). ACP™ device (N = 15): diameters were 20 ± 5, 25 ± 4 and 23 ± 4 for TEE, CCTA and inserted device, respectively. Average perimeters were 58 ± 11, 72 ± 15 and 72 ± 13 mm for TEE, CCTA and inserted device, respectively. Excellent correlation and agreement with the device size was found for CCTA compared to TEE. CCTA perimeter >100 mm and "cactus" 3D configuration had a specificity of 96 and 81% respectively for procedure failure. CCTA LAA ostial perimeter predicted better the optimal occluder size as compared with the currently used LAA TEE diameter. Moreover, CCTA 3D data may help in predicting potential complications. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 37 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 5 | 14% |
| Researcher | 5 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 5 | 14% |
| Unknown | 10 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 18 | 49% |
| Engineering | 2 | 5% |
| Sports and Recreations | 2 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Unknown | 10 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 06 May 2017.
All research outputs
#20,674,485
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging
#1,292
of 2,012 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#321,391
of 422,904 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging
#16
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,012 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.3. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 422,904 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.