↓ Skip to main content

Acute exacerbation of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: lessons learned from acute respiratory distress syndrome?

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, March 2018
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 (91st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (53rd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
36 X users
facebook
4 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
68 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
117 Mendeley
Title
Acute exacerbation of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: lessons learned from acute respiratory distress syndrome?
Published in
Critical Care, March 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13054-018-2002-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alessandro Marchioni, Roberto Tonelli, Lorenzo Ball, Riccardo Fantini, Ivana Castaniere, Stefania Cerri, Fabrizio Luppi, Mario Malerba, Paolo Pelosi, Enrico Clini

Abstract

Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is a fibrotic lung disease characterized by progressive loss of lung function and poor prognosis. The so-called acute exacerbation of IPF (AE-IPF) may lead to severe hypoxemia requiring mechanical ventilation in the intensive care unit (ICU). AE-IPF shares several pathophysiological features with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), a very severe condition commonly treated in this setting.A review of the literature has been conducted to underline similarities and differences in the management of patients with AE-IPF and ARDS.During AE-IPF, diffuse alveolar damage and massive loss of aeration occurs, similar to what is observed in patients with ARDS. Differently from ARDS, no studies have yet concluded on the optimal ventilatory strategy and management in AE-IPF patients admitted to the ICU. Notwithstanding, a protective ventilation strategy with low tidal volume and low driving pressure could be recommended similarly to ARDS. The beneficial effect of high levels of positive end-expiratory pressure and prone positioning has still to be elucidated in AE-IPF patients, as well as the precise role of other types of respiratory assistance (e.g., extracorporeal membrane oxygenation) or innovative therapies (e.g., polymyxin-B direct hemoperfusion). The use of systemic drugs such as steroids or immunosuppressive agents in AE-IPF is controversial and potentially associated with an increased risk of serious adverse reactions.Common pathophysiological abnormalities and similar clinical needs suggest translating to AE-IPF the lessons learned from the management of ARDS patients. Studies focused on specific therapeutic strategies during AE-IPF are warranted.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 36 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 117 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 117 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 14 12%
Researcher 13 11%
Student > Master 13 11%
Student > Postgraduate 12 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 10 9%
Other 33 28%
Unknown 22 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 66 56%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 3%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 2%
Other 12 10%
Unknown 26 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 29. 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 13 April 2019.
All research outputs
#1,342,473
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#1,155
of 6,555 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,664
of 346,639 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#44
of 95 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,555 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 346,639 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 95 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 53% of its contemporaries.