↓ Skip to main content

Risk model for predicting complications in patients undergoing atrial fibrillation ablation

Overview of attention for article published in Heart Rhythm, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (58th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
44 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Risk model for predicting complications in patients undergoing atrial fibrillation ablation
Published in
Heart Rhythm, May 2017
DOI 10.1016/j.hrthm.2017.04.042
Pubmed ID
Authors

Santosh K. Padala, Sampath Gunda, Parikshit S. Sharma, Le Kang, Jayanthi N. Koneru, Kenneth A. Ellenbogen

Abstract

Predictors of complications from AF ablation have been identified in small studies. The combination of risk factors to predict complications after ablation has not yet been explored. To develop a risk score model that predicts complications after AF ablation. The National Inpatient Sample database was utilized to identify 106,105 patients who underwent AF ablation. The study population was split into derivation cohort (DC, 2007-2010, n= 56,658) and validation cohort (VC, 2011-2013, n= 49,447). Multivariate predictors of any complication were identified in DC using regression analysis and a risk score model was developed. The cohorts were divided into 5-groups (risk score in parentheses): group 0 (0), 1 (1-10), 2 (11-20), 3 (21-30) and 4 (31-61). Patients in VC were older, likely to be white, female and had a higher prevalence of co-morbidities. The overall complication rate (6.9% vs. 8.3%, p<0.0001) and in-hospital mortality rate (0.3% vs. 0.5%, p<0.0001) was lower in VC vs. DC. Multivariate analysis yielded 9 predictors for any complication (weightage points in parentheses): CVA (19), CHF (12), coagulopathy (11), renal failure (7), PVD (6), age ≥50 years (2), female (2), COPD (1) and non-white (1). In the overall cohort, risk of complications in groups 0, 1, 2, 3 and 4 was 3.6%, 6.5%, 15.5%, 29.5%, and 45.7% respectively and in-hospital mortality was 0%, 0.2%, 2%, 4.6% and 6.1% respectively. Similar trends were observed in DC and VC. A practical risk score model can be used preoperatively to risk stratify patients undergoing AF ablation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 44 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 16%
Other 6 14%
Researcher 4 9%
Student > Bachelor 3 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 7%
Other 6 14%
Unknown 15 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 36%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 9%
Arts and Humanities 1 2%
Engineering 1 2%
Unknown 22 50%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 September 2017.
All research outputs
#6,850,695
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Heart Rhythm
#1,782
of 4,509 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#100,788
of 324,351 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Heart Rhythm
#48
of 117 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,509 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 324,351 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 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 117 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 58% of its contemporaries.