↓ Skip to main content

Multiple ultrasound cavitation-enabled treatments for myocardial reduction

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Therapeutic Ultrasound, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
14 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
Multiple ultrasound cavitation-enabled treatments for myocardial reduction
Published in
Journal of Therapeutic Ultrasound, November 2017
DOI 10.1186/s40349-017-0107-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Douglas L. Miller, Xiaofang Lu, Chunyan Dou, Yiying I. Zhu, Mario L. Fabiilli, Gabe E. Owens, Oliver D. Kripfgans

Abstract

Ultrasound myocardial cavitation enabled treatment (MCET) is an image-guided method for tissue reduction. In this study, a strategy of fractionated (multiple) treatments was tested for efficacy. Dahl SS rats were anesthetized and prepared for treatment with a focused ultrasound transducer in a warm water bath. Aiming at the anterior left ventricular wall was facilitated by imaging with a 10 MHz phased array (10S, GE Vivid 7, GE Vingmed Ultrasound, Horten, Norway). MCET was accomplished at 1.5 MHz by pulse bursts of 4 MPa peak rarefactional pressure amplitude, which were intermittently triggered 1:8 from the ECG during infusion of a microbubble suspension for cavitation nucleation. Test groups were sham, a 200 s treatment, three 200 s treatments a week apart, and a 600 s treatment. Treatment outcome was observed by plasma troponin after 4 h, echocardiographic monitoring and histology at 6 wk. The impacts of the fractionated treatments summed to approximately the same as the long treatment; e. g. the troponin result was 10.5 ± 3.2 for 200 s, 22.7 ± 5.4 (p < 0.001) for the summed fractionated treatments and 29.9 ± 6.4 for 600 s (p = 0.06 relative to the summed fractionated). While wall thickness was not reduced for the fractionated treatment, tissue strain was reduced by 35% in the target area relative sham (p < 0.001). The ability to fractionate treatment may be advantageous for optimizing patient outcome relative to all-or nothing therapy by surgical myectomy or alcohol ablation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users 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 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 14 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 14%
Researcher 2 14%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 14%
Student > Master 1 7%
Other 1 7%
Other 2 14%
Unknown 4 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 4 29%
Engineering 2 14%
Physics and Astronomy 1 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 7%
Unknown 6 43%
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 21 November 2017.
All research outputs
#18,142,662
of 23,306,612 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Therapeutic Ultrasound
#59
of 77 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#238,065
of 332,020 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Therapeutic Ultrasound
#3
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,306,612 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 77 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% 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 332,020 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.