↓ Skip to main content

Extracorporeal Renal Replacement Therapies in the Treatment of Sepsis: Where Are We?

Overview of attention for article published in Seminars in Nephrology, January 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
67 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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.
Article details
Title
Extracorporeal Renal Replacement Therapies in the Treatment of Sepsis: Where Are We?
Published in
Seminars in Nephrology, January 2015
DOI 10.1016/j.semnephrol.2015.01.006
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is common among the critically ill, affecting approximately 40% of patients. Sepsis is the cause of AKI in almost 50% of cases of intensive care patients, however, any evidence-based treatment for sepsis-associated AKI is lacking. Furthermore, the underlying pathophysiology of septic AKI is inadequately understood given the disparity between severe functional changes and limited tubular injury. What is clear is that within this complex interplay leading to septic AKI, the inflammatory response plays a pivotal role and hence modulation of this response may translate to improved outcomes. We outline the use of extracorporeal therapies in the treatment of sepsis and septic AKI. We consider the classic aspects of extracorporeal renal replacement therapy including indications, timing, and delivered dose. The various techniques that currently are used to try and achieve immune homeostasis also are outlined. As well as discussing the evidence accumulated to date, we also suggest possibilities for the future treatment of our patients.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 67 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Italy 3 4%
United States 1 1%
Mexico 1 1%
Unknown 62 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 18%
Other 10 15%
Student > Postgraduate 9 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 10%
Professor 6 9%
Other 12 18%
Unknown 11 16%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 47 70%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Engineering 2 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 1%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 13 19%
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 29 July 2015.
All research outputs
#22,759,452
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Seminars in Nephrology
#551
of 614 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#306,533
of 359,538 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Seminars in Nephrology
#7
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 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 614 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. 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 359,538 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 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.