↓ Skip to main content

Rapid deployment valve system shortens operative times for aortic valve replacement through right anterior minithoracotomy

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (53rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
30 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Rapid deployment valve system shortens operative times for aortic valve replacement through right anterior minithoracotomy
Published in
Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery, May 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13019-017-0598-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Constanze Bening, Khaled Hamouda, Mehmet Oezkur, Christoph Schimmer, Ina Schade, Armin Gorski, Ivan Aleksic, Rainer Leyh

Abstract

There is growing evidence from the literature that right anterior minithoracotomy aortic valve replacement (RAT-AVR) improves clinical outcome. However, increased cross clamp time is the strongest argument for surgeons not performing RAT-AVR. Rapid deployment aortic valve systems have the potential to decrease cross-clamp time and ease this procedure. We assessed clinical outcome of rapid deployment and conventional valves through RAT. Sixty-eight patients (mean age 76 ± 6 years, 32% females) underwent RAT-AVR between 9/2013 and 7/2015. According to the valve type implanted the patients were divided into two groups. In 43 patients (R-group; mean age 74.1 ± 6.6 years) a rapid deployment valve system (Edwards Intuity, Edwards Lifesciences Corp; Irvine, Calif) and in 25 patients (C-group; mean age 74.2 ± 6.6 years) a conventional stented biological aortic valve was implanted. Aortic cross-clamp (42.1 ± 12 min vs. 68.3 ± 20.3 min; p < 0.001) and bypass time (80.4 ± 39.3 min vs. 106.6 ± 23.2 min; p = 0.001) were shorter in the rapid deployment group (R-group). We observed no differences in clinical outcome. Postoperative gradients (R-group: max gradient, 14.3 ± 8 mmHg vs. 15.5 ± 5 mmHg (C-group), mean gradient, 9.2 ± 1.7 mmHg (R-group) vs. 9.1 ± 2.3 mmHg (C-group) revealed no differences. However, larger prostheses were implanted in C-group (25 mm; IQR 23-27 mm vs. 23 mm; IQR 21-25; p = 0.009). Our data suggest that the rapid deployment aortic valve system reduced cross clamp and bypass time in patients undergoing RAT-AVR with similar hemodynamics as with larger size stented prosthesis. However, larger studies and long-term follow-up are mandatory to confirm our findings.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 30 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 6 20%
Researcher 4 13%
Student > Master 3 10%
Other 2 7%
Student > Postgraduate 2 7%
Other 5 17%
Unknown 8 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 53%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Social Sciences 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 9 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 13 August 2018.
All research outputs
#7,528,244
of 22,973,051 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery
#152
of 1,241 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#119,410
of 310,607 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery
#3
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,973,051 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,241 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 310,607 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 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 7 of them.