↓ Skip to main content

The Hot and the Cold: Radiofrequency Versus Cryoballoon Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation

Overview of attention for article published in Current Cardiology Reports, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
40 Mendeley
Title
The Hot and the Cold: Radiofrequency Versus Cryoballoon Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation
Published in
Current Cardiology Reports, August 2015
DOI 10.1007/s11886-015-0631-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Richard Ang, Giulia Domenichini, Malcolm C. Finlay, Richard J. Schilling, Ross J. Hunter

Abstract

Catheter ablation is superior to antiarrhythmic drugs in maintaining sinus rhythm for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Pulmonary vein (PV) isolation is the cornerstone of any AF ablation procedure. Conventionally, this is achieved by performing point by point lesions using radiofrequency (RF) energy. However, this is technically challenging, time consuming and is associated with a number of complications. Long-term durability of PV isolation is also a concern. To address these issues, 'one-shot' energy delivery systems and alternative energy sources have been developed. The cryoballoon system has emerged as the most commonly used alternative to point by point RF technology. In this paper, we compare the technology, biophysics and clinical data of cryoballoon to conventional RF ablation for AF. The safety and efficacy of cryoballoon compared to RF ablation is critically reviewed. We conclude by looking at future applications of this technology.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 3%
United States 1 3%
Poland 1 3%
Unknown 37 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 18%
Professor > Associate Professor 6 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 15%
Student > Bachelor 3 8%
Researcher 3 8%
Other 8 20%
Unknown 7 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 55%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 8%
Engineering 3 8%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 5%
Computer Science 1 3%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 6 15%
Attention Score in Context

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 March 2016.
All research outputs
#18,430,119
of 22,832,057 outputs
Outputs from Current Cardiology Reports
#743
of 999 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#190,418
of 264,406 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Cardiology Reports
#15
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,832,057 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 999 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% 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 264,406 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 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.