↓ Skip to main content

Deterioration of glycemic control after corticosteroid administration in islet autotransplant recipients: a cautionary tale

Overview of attention for article published in Acta Diabetologica, August 2011
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
14 Mendeley
Title
Deterioration of glycemic control after corticosteroid administration in islet autotransplant recipients: a cautionary tale
Published in
Acta Diabetologica, August 2011
DOI 10.1007/s00592-011-0315-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anh Ngo, David E. R. Sutherland, Gregory J. Beilman, Melena D. Bellin

Abstract

Islet autotransplantation (IAT) is performed at the time of total pancreatectomy (TP) to prevent or minimize post-surgical diabetes. Corticosteroids induce insulin resistance and present a risk to islet autografts, through glucotoxicity and increased metabolic demand on a marginal islet mass. We present four IAT recipients treated with oral or injected corticosteroids after transplant for medical conditions unrelated to chronic pancreatitis or TPIAT. Hyperglycemia or insulin resistance was evident in all four patients, including reversion to long-term insulin therapy in two patients. One patient receiving corticosteroid injections had a transient increase in hemoglobin A1c (+0.6% above baseline), and one patient given a one time dose of oral dexamethasone exhibited hyperglycemia despite high insulin (>200 mU/L) and C-peptide (15.3 ng/mL) production on an oral glucose tolerance test. IAT recipients have insufficient islet mass to compensate for the insulin resistance induced by corticosteroids. Caution should be given to using these agents in IAT recipients. When corticosteroids are medically necessary, insulin therapy should be administered temporarily to compensate for the increased metabolic demand and minimize long-term risks on the islet graft.

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 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 %
Other 3 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 14%
Student > Postgraduate 2 14%
Unspecified 1 7%
Student > Master 1 7%
Other 3 21%
Unknown 2 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 4 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 21%
Computer Science 2 14%
Unspecified 1 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 7%
Other 1 7%
Unknown 2 14%
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 11 October 2014.
All research outputs
#15,307,723
of 22,766,595 outputs
Outputs from Acta Diabetologica
#515
of 889 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#85,186
of 120,437 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Acta Diabetologica
#4
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,766,595 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 889 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% 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 120,437 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.