To compare the procedure, recovery, hospitalization times, and costs along with patient/parent satisfaction after newer-generation cardiac implantable loop recorder (Reveal LINQ; Medtronic Inc, Minneapolis, Minnesota) and previous-generation implantable loop recorder (Reveal XT; Medtronic Inc).
A prospective study of patients undergoing LINQ implantations between April 2014 and October 2015 was performed. Retrospective chart review of patients undergoing XT implantations was performed for comparison.
Thirty-one patients received LINQ and 15 patients received XT. Indications included syncope/palpitations (28/46, 61%), history of arrhythmias (9/46, 20%), arrhythmia burden in congenital heart disease (5/46, 10%), and monitoring in channelopathies (4/46, 9%). The LINQ group underwent more conscious sedation procedures than the XT group (8/31 vs 0/15, P = .04) with shorter procedural time (9 vs 34 minutes, P <.001), room occupation time (38 vs 81 minutes, P <.001), recovery time (21 vs 67 minutes, P <.001), and total hospital time (214 vs 264 minutes, P = .046). The LINQ group also had shorter return to activity time (2 vs 5 days, P = 1). Three device erosions in the LINQ group required reintervention. The LINQ group had fewer body image issues than the XT group (1/26 vs 5/14, P = .01) with both groups scoring 5/5 overall patient/parent satisfaction score at follow-up. Both groups had comparable total direct hospital costs (US $5905 vs $5438, P = .8).
LINQ offers better procedural and recovery time compared with XT. LINQ implantations under conscious sedation reduce total hospitalization time.
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science
2
11%
Nursing and Health Professions
1
6%
Social Sciences
1
6%
Unknown
9
50%
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 23 May 2017.
All research outputs
#28,611,663
of 34,372,222 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Pediatrics
#13,791
of 15,550 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#289,517
of 361,107 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Pediatrics
#173
of 194 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,372,222 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,550 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.3. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% 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 361,107 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 194 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.
