↓ Skip to main content

Magnetic resonance of the heart in a muscular dystrophy patient with an MR conditional ICD: Assessment of safety, diagnostic value and technical limitations

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging, June 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
17 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
Magnetic resonance of the heart in a muscular dystrophy patient with an MR conditional ICD: Assessment of safety, diagnostic value and technical limitations
Published in
Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging, June 2013
DOI 10.1186/1532-429x-15-49
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anca Florian, Anna Ludwig, Sabine Rösch, Udo Sechtem, Ali Yilmaz

Abstract

Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) studies in patients with pacemakers or implantable cardioverter/defibrillators (ICD) are increasingly required in daily clinical practice. Therefore, in the last years the manufacturers developed not only MR-conditional pacemakers, but also MR-conditional ICDs. However, the clinical experience regarding the feasibility and limitations of MR studies of the heart in patients with ICDs is still limited. In particular, there are hardly any CMR studies in the same patients performed prior to and post ICD implantation allowing a one-to-one comparison of the obtained CMR images. This is the first presentation of a CMR study in a patient with the world's first and so far only MR-conditional ICD. In our case, a major problem related to the presence of the MR conditional ICD was an image artifact caused by the device's generator which hampered the visualization of the midventricular and apical anterior and antero-lateral segments in all sequences performed. Considering previous studies, right chest implantation of the ICD could probably have helped in this setting and may be preferred in future ICD implantations. Our case report nicely illustrates the real clinical need for specially designed implantable devices that ensure safe and high-quality imaging in patients in whom serial CMR is required.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 17 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 29%
Student > Master 2 12%
Student > Bachelor 2 12%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 12%
Researcher 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 4 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 53%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 6%
Computer Science 1 6%
Engineering 1 6%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 24%
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 14 June 2013.
All research outputs
#23,069,091
of 25,711,518 outputs
Outputs from Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging
#1,293
of 1,386 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#186,512
of 211,075 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Reviews in Diagnostic Imaging
#17
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,711,518 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 1,386 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. 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 211,075 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 25 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.