↓ Skip to main content

Extracorporeal life support devices and strategies for management of acute cardiorespiratory failure in adult patients: a comprehensive review

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, May 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (80th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
151 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
215 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
Extracorporeal life support devices and strategies for management of acute cardiorespiratory failure in adult patients: a comprehensive review
Published in
Critical Care, May 2014
DOI 10.1186/cc13865
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kiran Shekar, Daniel V Mullany, Bruce Thomson, Marc Ziegenfuss, David G Platts, John F Fraser

Abstract

Evolution of extracorporeal life support (ECLS) technology has added a new dimension to the intensive care management of acute cardiac and/or respiratory failure in adult patients who fail conventional treatment. ECLS also complements cardiac surgical and cardiology procedures, implantation of long-term mechanical cardiac assist devices, heart and lung transplantation and cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Available ECLS therapies provide a range of options to the multidisciplinary teams who are involved in the time-critical care of these complex patients. While venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) can provide complete respiratory support, extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal facilitates protective lung ventilation and provides only partial respiratory support. Mechanical circulatory support with venoarterial (VA) ECMO employed in a traditional central/peripheral fashion or in a temporary ventricular assist device configuration may stabilise patients with decompensated cardiac failure who have evidence of end-organ dysfunction, allowing time for recovery, decision-making, and bridging to implantation of a long-term mechanical circulatory support device and occasionally heart transplantation. In highly selected patients with combined severe cardiac and respiratory failure, advanced ECLS can be provided with central VA ECMO, peripheral VA ECMO with timely transition to venovenous ECMO or VA-venous ECMO upon myocardial recovery to avoid upper body hypoxia or by addition of an oxygenator to the temporary ventricular assist device circuit. This article summarises the available ECLS options and provides insights into the principles and practice of these techniques. One should emphasise that, as is common with many emerging therapies, their optimal use is currently not backed by quality evidence. This deficiency needs to be addressed to ensure that the full potential of ECLS can be achieved.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 215 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 1%
Italy 2 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Czechia 1 <1%
Unknown 206 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 28 13%
Researcher 25 12%
Student > Master 24 11%
Student > Postgraduate 21 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 7%
Other 63 29%
Unknown 38 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 128 60%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 5%
Engineering 8 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 2%
Chemistry 2 <1%
Other 12 6%
Unknown 51 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 04 May 2016.
All research outputs
#4,835,823
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#3,282
of 6,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#44,826
of 241,872 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#48
of 138 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,554 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.8. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% 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 241,872 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 138 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.