↓ Skip to main content

Intravenous amino acid therapy for kidney function in critically ill patients: a randomized controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in Intensive Care Medicine, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (77th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user
patent
1 patent

Citations

dimensions_citation
154 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
183 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Intravenous amino acid therapy for kidney function in critically ill patients: a randomized controlled trial
Published in
Intensive Care Medicine, April 2015
DOI 10.1007/s00134-015-3827-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gordon S. Doig, Fiona Simpson, Rinaldo Bellomo, Philippa T. Heighes, Elizabeth A. Sweetman, Douglas Chesher, Carol Pollock, Andrew Davies, John Botha, Peter Harrigan, Michael C. Reade

Abstract

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is characterized by severe loss of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) and is associated with a prolonged intensive care unit (ICU) stay and increased risk of death. No interventions have yet been shown to prevent AKI or preserve GFR in critically ill patients. Evidence from mammalian physiology and small clinical trials suggests higher amino acid intake may protect the kidney from ischemic insults and thus may preserve GFR during critical illness. To determine whether amino acid therapy, achieved through daily intravenous (IV) supplementation with standard amino acids, preserves kidney function in critically ill patients. Multicenter, phase II, randomized clinical trial conducted between December 2010 and February 2013 in the ICUs of 16 community and tertiary hospitals in Australia and New Zealand. Participants were adult critically ill patients expected to remain in the study ICU for longer than 2 days. Random allocation to receive a daily supplement of up to 100 g of IV amino acids or standard care. Duration of renal dysfunction (primary outcome); estimated GFR (eGFR) derived from creatinine; eGFR derived from cystatin C; urinary output; renal replacement therapy (RRT) use; fluid balance and other measures of renal function. 474 patients were enrolled and randomized (235 to standard care, 239 to IV amino acid therapy). At time of enrollment, patients allocated to receive amino acid therapy had higher APACHE II scores (20.2 ± 6.8 vs. 21.7 ± 7.6, P = 0.02) and more patients had pre-existing renal dysfunction (29/235 vs. 44/239, P = 0.07). Duration of renal dysfunction after enrollment did not differ between groups (mean difference 0.21 AKI days per 10 patient ICU days, 95 % CI -0.27 to 1.04, P = 0.45). Amino acid therapy significantly improved eGFR (treatment group × time interaction, P = 0.004), with an early peak difference of 7.7 mL/min/1.73 m(2) (95 % CI 1.0-14.5 mL/min/1.73 m(2), P = 0.02) on study day 4. Daily urine output was also significantly increased (+300 mL/day, 95 % CI 145-455 mL, P = 0.0002). There was a trend towards increased RRT use in patients receiving amino acid therapy (13/235 vs. 25/239, P = 0.062); however, this trend was not present after controlling for baseline imbalance (P = 0.21). Treatment with a daily IV supplement of standard amino acids did not alter our primary outcome, duration of renal dysfunction. anzctr.org.au Identifier: ACTRN12609001015235.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Italy 1 <1%
Unknown 182 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 26 14%
Researcher 22 12%
Other 19 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 7%
Student > Bachelor 13 7%
Other 42 23%
Unknown 48 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 90 49%
Nursing and Health Professions 17 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 2%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 1%
Other 12 7%
Unknown 54 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 28 July 2022.
All research outputs
#4,557,501
of 22,971,207 outputs
Outputs from Intensive Care Medicine
#2,238
of 5,007 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#57,962
of 264,397 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Intensive Care Medicine
#19
of 95 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,971,207 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,007 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 264,397 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.