↓ Skip to main content

Characterization of pulmonary impairment associated with COVID-19 in patients requiring mechanical ventilation

Overview of attention for article published in Revista Brasileira de Terapia Intensiva, January 2021
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
41 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
Characterization of pulmonary impairment associated with COVID-19 in patients requiring mechanical ventilation
Published in
Revista Brasileira de Terapia Intensiva, January 2021
DOI 10.5935/0103-507x.20210007
Pubmed ID
Authors

Edouard Virot, Cyrille Mathien, Valentin Pointurier, Antoine Poidevin, Guylaine Labro, Luis Pinto, Louise Marie Jandeaux, Joy Mootien, Khaldoun Kuteifan

Abstract

To detect early respiratory and hemodynamic instability to characterize pulmonary impairment in patients with severe COVID-19. We retrospectively analyzed data collected from COVID-19 patients suffering from acute respiratory failure requiring intubation and mechanical ventilation. We used transpulmonary thermodilution assessment with a PiCCO™ device. We collected demographic, respiratory, hemodynamic and echocardiographic data within the first 48 hours after admission. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the data. Fifty-three patients with severe COVID-19 were admitted between March 22nd and April 7th. Twelve of them (22.6%) were monitored with a PiCCO™ device. Upon admission, the global-end diastolic volume indexed was normal (mean 738.8mL ± 209.2) and moderately increased at H48 (879mL ± 179), and the cardiac index was subnormal (2.84 ± 0.65). All patients showed extravascular lung water over 8mL/kg on admission (17.9 ± 8.9). We did not identify any argument for cardiogenic failure. In the case of severe COVID-19 pneumonia, hemodynamic and respiratory presentation is consistent with pulmonary edema without evidence of cardiogenic origin, favoring the diagnosis of acute respiratory distress syndrome.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 41 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 11 27%
Student > Master 4 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Researcher 2 5%
Lecturer 1 2%
Other 4 10%
Unknown 16 39%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 22%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Psychology 1 2%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 16 39%
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 01 May 2021.
All research outputs
#22,774,430
of 25,387,668 outputs
Outputs from Revista Brasileira de Terapia Intensiva
#282
of 350 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#448,987
of 519,506 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Revista Brasileira de Terapia Intensiva
#20
of 25 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 519,506 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 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.