| Title |
Transseptal Transcatheter Mitral Valve Replacement Using Balloon-Expandable Transcatheter Heart Valves A Step-by-Step Approach
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions, October 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.jcin.2017.06.069 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Marina Urena, Dominique Himbert, Eric Brochet, Jose Luis Carrasco, Bernard Iung, Patrick Nataf, Alec Vahanian |
| Abstract |
Transcatheter mitral valve replacement (TMVR) using balloon-expandable valves has become an alternative therapy for selected patients with mitral valve disease. Up to now, the transapical approach has been the preferred route, but the transseptal approach is becoming increasingly popular due to its reduced invasiveness and increased safety. However, transseptal TMVR procedures are technically challenging, and little is known about the screening process required before this therapy. The authors provide operators with a step-by-step approach from the screening process to follow-up care for transseptal TMVR procedures. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 73 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 | 10 | 14% |
| Spain | 8 | 11% |
| Mexico | 4 | 5% |
| Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | 4 | 5% |
| Argentina | 3 | 4% |
| Portugal | 2 | 3% |
| Netherlands | 2 | 3% |
| Colombia | 2 | 3% |
| Australia | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 10 | 14% |
| Unknown | 26 | 36% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 44 | 60% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 15 | 21% |
| Scientists | 10 | 14% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 4 | 5% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 80 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 80 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 17 | 21% |
| Other | 10 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 6% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 10 | 13% |
| Unknown | 28 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 36 | 45% |
| Engineering | 3 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Psychology | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 3 | 4% |
| Unknown | 33 | 41% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 45. 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 09 January 2024.
All research outputs
#922,163
of 25,461,852 outputs
Outputs from JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions
#305
of 4,042 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#19,143
of 331,480 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions
#10
of 90 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,461,852 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,042 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 331,480 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 90 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.