↓ Skip to main content

Catheter manipulation analysis for objective performance and technical skills assessment in transcatheter aortic valve implantation

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
63 Mendeley
Title
Catheter manipulation analysis for objective performance and technical skills assessment in transcatheter aortic valve implantation
Published in
International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery, April 2016
DOI 10.1007/s11548-016-1391-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Evangelos B. Mazomenos, Ping-Lin Chang, Radoslaw A. Rippel, Alexander Rolls, David J. Hawkes, Colin D. Bicknell, Adrien Desjardins, Celia V. Riga, Danail Stoyanov

Abstract

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) demands precise and efficient handling of surgical instruments within the confines of the aortic anatomy. Operational performance and dexterous skills are critical for patient safety, and objective methods are assessed with a number of manipulation features, derived from the kinematic analysis of the catheter/guidewire in fluoroscopy video sequences. A silicon phantom model of a type I aortic arch was used for this study. Twelve endovascular surgeons, divided into two experience groups, experts ([Formula: see text]) and novices ([Formula: see text]), performed cannulation of the aorta, representative of valve placement in TAVI. Each participant completed two TAVI experiments, one with conventional catheters and one with the Magellan robotic platform. Video sequences of the fluoroscopic monitor were recorded for procedural processing. A semi-automated tracking software provided the 2D coordinates of the catheter/guidewire tip. In addition, the aorta phantom was segmented in the videos and the shape of the entire catheter was manually annotated in a subset of the available video frames using crowdsourcing. The TAVI procedure was divided into two stages, and various metrics, representative of the catheter's overall navigation as well as its relative movement to the vessel wall, were developed. Experts consistently exhibited lower values of procedure time and dimensionless jerk, and higher average speed and acceleration than novices. Robotic navigation resulted in increased average distance to the vessel wall in both groups, a surrogate measure of safety and reduced risk of embolisation. Discrimination of experience level and types of equipment was achieved with the generated motion features and established clustering algorithms. Evaluation of surgical skills is possible through the analysis of the catheter/guidewire motion pattern. The use of robotic endovascular platforms seems to enable more precise and controlled catheter navigation.

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 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 62 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 22%
Student > Bachelor 8 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 10%
Student > Postgraduate 4 6%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 6%
Other 11 17%
Unknown 16 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 33%
Engineering 12 19%
Computer Science 3 5%
Unspecified 2 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Other 6 10%
Unknown 17 27%
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 26 April 2016.
All research outputs
#20,322,106
of 22,865,319 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery
#667
of 847 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#254,995
of 300,907 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery
#22
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,865,319 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 847 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. 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 300,907 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 27 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.