↓ Skip to main content

Does high PEEP prevent alveolar cycling?

Overview of attention for article published in Medizinische Klinik - Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
15 Mendeley
Title
Does high PEEP prevent alveolar cycling?
Published in
Medizinische Klinik - Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin, November 2017
DOI 10.1007/s00063-017-0375-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

M. Cressoni, C. Chiurazzi, D. Chiumello, L. Gattinoni

Abstract

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) patients need mechanical ventilation to sustain gas exchange. Animal experiments showed that mechanical ventilation with high volume/plateau pressure and no positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) damages healthy lungs, while low tidal volumes and the application of higher PEEP levels are protective. PEEP makes the lung homogeneous, reducing the pressure multiplication at the interface between lung units with different inflation statuses and keeps the lung open through the whole respiratory cycle, avoiding intratidal opening and closing. Four randomized clinical trials tested a higher PEEP strategy compared to a lower PEEP strategy but failed to show any survival benefit. These results, which apparently contradict preclinical data, may be explained by CT scanning, which investigates the behaviour of ARDS lung upon inflation and deflation demonstrating that: (1) 15 cmH2O PEEP is insufficient to overcome the closing pressures of the lung and keep it open through the whole respiratory cycle; (2) lung recruitment is continuous along the volume-pressure curve. The application of a PEEP level around 15 cmH2O does not abolish opening and closing, but the lung region undergoing opening and closing is simply shifted downward, i. e. becomes more vertebral in the supine patient. (3) Recruited lung tissue becomes poorly inflated and not well inflated; poorly inflated tissue is inhomogeneous: while increasing PEEP the reduction in lung inhomogeneity is small or non-existent.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 15 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 3 20%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 7%
Student > Bachelor 1 7%
Professor 1 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 7%
Other 2 13%
Unknown 6 40%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 47%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 7%
Unknown 6 40%
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 25 November 2017.
All research outputs
#13,337,759
of 23,008,860 outputs
Outputs from Medizinische Klinik - Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin
#121
of 540 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#159,471
of 326,002 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Medizinische Klinik - Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin
#5
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,008,860 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 540 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 326,002 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 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 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 70% of its contemporaries.