↓ Skip to main content

Ventricular tachycardia catheter ablation in arrhythmogenic right ventricular dysplasia: A 16-year experience

Overview of attention for article published in Current Cardiology Reports, November 2000
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
69 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
23 Mendeley
Title
Ventricular tachycardia catheter ablation in arrhythmogenic right ventricular dysplasia: A 16-year experience
Published in
Current Cardiology Reports, November 2000
DOI 10.1007/s11886-000-0034-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Guy Fontaine, Joelci Tonet, Yves Gallais, Gilles Lascault, Françoise Hidden-Lucet, Philip Aouate, Franck Halimi, François Poulain, Nicolas Johnson, Hanène Charfeddine, Robert Frank

Abstract

Arrhythmogenic right ventricular dysplasia (ARVD) is a structural heart disease affecting young adults that leads to cardiac rhythm disorders including supraventricular and mostly ventricular arrhythmias. Sudden death may be the first presentation of the disease. Ablation techniques have been used for the treatment of ventricular tachycardia in cases resistant to drug therapy. Radiofrequency is appropriate as a first approach for ventricular tachycardia ablation in ARVD; however, its effectiveness is less than 40% at the first session. Fulguration is effective for ventricular tachy-cardia ablation and should be used in the same session after ineffective radiofrequency ablation. However, fulguration requires expertise, general anesthesia, and more than one session in half of all patients. Radiofrequency and fulguration plus other common forms of treatment including pacemakers and automatic implantable cardioverter defibrillators provides a clinical success rate of 81% to 93% in a series of 50 consecutive patients studied during 16 years. Earlier poor reputation of fulguration was the result of poorly understood technical problems concerning the physics and biophysics of the procedure under control with presently available methods. This in-depth study of a large population over a long time period demonstrates that fulguration should be rehabilitated.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 23 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 6 26%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 22%
Researcher 2 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 1 4%
Student > Postgraduate 1 4%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 8 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 43%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 4%
Psychology 1 4%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 4%
Neuroscience 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 8 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 20 May 2012.
All research outputs
#4,695,422
of 22,783,848 outputs
Outputs from Current Cardiology Reports
#202
of 997 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,063
of 39,557 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Cardiology Reports
#1
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,783,848 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 76th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 997 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 39,557 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 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them