↓ Skip to main content

Antecedentes de insuficiência cardíaca se associam a tratamento com menor volume de fluidos em pacientes sépticos

Overview of attention for article published in Revista Brasileira de Terapia Intensiva, October 2019
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
5 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
Antecedentes de insuficiência cardíaca se associam a tratamento com menor volume de fluidos em pacientes sépticos
Published in
Revista Brasileira de Terapia Intensiva, October 2019
DOI 10.5935/0103-507x.20190049
Pubmed ID
Authors

Carlos Rodrigo Franco Palacios, Amanda M. Thompson, Federico Gorostiaga

Abstract

To identify the underlying factors that affect fluid resuscitation in septic patients. The present study was a case-control study of 181 consecutive patients admitted to a Medical Intensive Care Unit between 2012 and 2016 with a diagnosis of sepsis. Demographic, clinical, radiological and laboratory data were analyzed. One hundred-thirty patients (72%) received ≥ 30mL/kg of IV fluids on admission. On univariate analyses, a past history of coronary artery disease and heart failure was associated with less fluid therapy. On multivariate analyses, a history of heart failure (OR = 2.31; 95%CI 1.04 - 5.14) remained significantly associated with receiving less IV fluids. Left ventricular ejection fraction, systolic/diastolic function, left ventricular hypertrophy and pulmonary hypertension were not associated with IV fluids. The amount of IV fluids was not associated with differences in mortality. During the first 24 hours, patients with a past history of heart failure received 2,900mLof IV fluids [1,688 - 4,714mL] versus 3,977mL [2,500 - 6,200mL] received by those without a history of heart failure, p = 0.02. Septic patients with a past history of heart failure received 1L less IV fluids in the first 24 hours with no difference in mortality.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 5 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 3 60%
Researcher 1 20%
Unknown 1 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 2 40%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 20%
Unknown 1 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 17 October 2019.
All research outputs
#22,771,990
of 25,387,668 outputs
Outputs from Revista Brasileira de Terapia Intensiva
#282
of 350 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#316,577
of 368,829 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Revista Brasileira de Terapia Intensiva
#7
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,387,668 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 350 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 368,829 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.