↓ Skip to main content

Ischaemia reperfusion injury: mechanisms of progression to chronic graft dysfunction

Overview of attention for article published in Pediatric Nephrology, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
37 Mendeley
Title
Ischaemia reperfusion injury: mechanisms of progression to chronic graft dysfunction
Published in
Pediatric Nephrology, March 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00467-018-3940-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gerhard R. Situmorang, Neil S. Sheerin

Abstract

The increasing use of extended criteria organs to meet the demand for kidney transplantation raises an important question of how the severity of early ischaemic injury influences long-term outcomes. Significant acute ischaemic kidney injury is associated with delayed graft function, increased immune-associated events and, ultimately, earlier deterioration of graft function. A comprehensive understanding of immediate molecular events that ensue post-ischaemia and their potential long-term consequences are key to the discovery of novel therapeutic targets. Acute ischaemic injury primarily affects tubular structure and function. Depending on the severity and persistence of the insult, this may resolve completely, leading to restoration of normal function, or be sustained, resulting in persistent renal impairment and progressive functional loss. Long-term effects of acute renal ischaemia are mediated by several mechanisms including hypoxia, HIF-1 activation, endothelial dysfunction leading to vascular rarefaction, sustained pro-inflammatory stimuli involving innate and adaptive immune responses, failure of tubular cells to recover and epigenetic changes. This review describes the biological relevance and interaction of these mechanisms based on currently available evidence.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 37 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 16%
Student > Bachelor 5 14%
Student > Master 5 14%
Student > Postgraduate 3 8%
Other 5 14%
Unknown 7 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 30%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 14%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 5%
Mathematics 1 3%
Other 6 16%
Unknown 7 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 29 April 2019.
All research outputs
#14,098,338
of 23,031,582 outputs
Outputs from Pediatric Nephrology
#2,363
of 3,591 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#180,341
of 329,466 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pediatric Nephrology
#57
of 75 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,031,582 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,591 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 329,466 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 75 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.