| Title |
Feasibility of measurements of valve dimensions in en-face-3D transesophageal echocardiography
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging, May 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10554-017-1141-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sarah Eibel, Edwin Turton, Chirojit Mukherjee, Carmine Bevilacqua, Joerg Ender |
| Abstract |
Newest 3D software allows measurements directly in the en-face-3D TEE mode. Aim of the study was to ascertain whether measurements performed in the en-face-3D TEE mode are comparable with conventional measurement methods based on 2D TEE and 3D using the multiple plane reconstruction mode with the Qlab(®) software. En-face-3D TEE is used more frequently in daily clinical routine during cardiac operations. So far measurements could only be done based on 2D images or with the use of multi planar reconstruction mode with additional software. Measurement directly in the 3D image (en-face-3D TEE) would make measurements faster and easier to use in clinical practice. After approval by the local ethic committee and written informed consent from the patients additionally to a comprehensive perioperative 2D TEE examination a real time (RT) 3D zoom- dataset was recorded. Routine measurements of the length of anterior and posterior mitral valve leaflets as well as mitral valve and aortic valve areas were performed in en-face-3D TEE, multiplanar reconstruction mode using Qlab(®)-software (Philips, Netherlands) and 2D TEE standard views. Twenty nine patients with a mean age of 67 years undergoing elective cardiac surgery/interventions were enrolled in this study. Direct measurements in en-face-3D TEE mode lead to non significant underestimation of all parameters as compared to Qlab(®) and 2D TEE measurements. Measurements in en-face-3D TEE are feasible but lead to non significant underestimation compared to measurements performed with Qlab(®) or in 2D TEE views. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 21 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 4 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 14% |
| Other | 2 | 10% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 2 | 10% |
| Unknown | 5 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 48% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 14% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 10% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 5% |
| Psychology | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 3 | 14% |
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 12 May 2017.
All research outputs
#22,764,772
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging
#1,460
of 2,012 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#284,612
of 325,039 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging
#54
of 68 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 325,039 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 68 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.