↓ Skip to main content

Preclinical neuroprotective actions of xenon and possible implications for human therapeutics: a narrative review

Overview of attention for article published in Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d'anesthésie, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (55th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
20 Mendeley
Title
Preclinical neuroprotective actions of xenon and possible implications for human therapeutics: a narrative review
Published in
Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d'anesthésie, October 2015
DOI 10.1007/s12630-015-0507-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mervyn Maze

Abstract

The purpose of this report is to facilitate an understanding of the possible application of xenon for neuroprotection in critical care settings. This narrative review appraises the literature assessing the efficacy and safety of xenon in preclinical models of acute ongoing neurologic injury. Databases of the published literature (MEDLINE(®) and EMBASE™) were appraised for peer-reviewed manuscripts addressing the use of xenon in both preclinical models and disease states of acute ongoing neurologic injury. For randomized clinical trials not yet reported, the investigators' declarations in the National Institutes of Health clinical trials website were considered. While not a primary focus of this review, to date, xenon cannot be distinguished as superior for surgical anesthesia over existing alternatives in adults. Nevertheless, studies in a variety of preclinical disease models from multiple laboratories have consistently shown xenon's neuroprotective properties. These properties are enhanced in settings where xenon is combined with hypothermia. Small randomized clinical trials are underway to explore xenon's efficacy and safety in clinical settings of acute neurologic injury where hypothermia is the current standard of care. According to the evidence to date, the neuroprotective efficacy of xenon in preclinical models and its safety in clinical anesthesia set the stage for the launch of randomized clinical trials to determine whether these encouraging neuroprotective findings can be translated into clinical utility.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 20 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 2 10%
Student > Master 2 10%
Unspecified 1 5%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 5%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 5%
Other 2 10%
Unknown 11 55%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 4 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 5%
Unspecified 1 5%
Unknown 11 55%
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 26 February 2016.
All research outputs
#8,535,684
of 25,377,790 outputs
Outputs from Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d'anesthésie
#1,392
of 2,878 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#101,345
of 295,217 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d'anesthésie
#21
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,377,790 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,878 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% 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 295,217 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 55% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 50 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 52% of its contemporaries.