↓ Skip to main content

Severe citrate toxicity complicating volunteer apheresis platelet donation

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Clinical Apheresis, November 2006
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

patent
1 patent

Readers on

mendeley
20 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.
Article details
Title
Severe citrate toxicity complicating volunteer apheresis platelet donation
Published in
Journal of Clinical Apheresis, November 2006
DOI 10.1002/jca.20107
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

We report a case of severe citrate toxicity during volunteer donor apheresis platelet collection. The donor was a 40-year-old female, first-time apheresis platelet donor. Past medical history was remarkable for hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and depression. Reported medications included bumetanide, pravastatin, and paroxetine. Thirty minutes from the start of the procedure, the donor noted tingling around the mouth, hands, and feet. She then very rapidly developed acute onset of severe facial and extremity tetany. Empirical treatment with intravenous calcium gluconate was initiated, and muscle contractions slowly subsided over approximately 10 to 15 minutes. The events are consistent with a severe reaction to calcium chelation by sodium citrate anticoagulant resulting in symptomatic systemic hypocalcemia. Upon additional retrospective analysis, it was noted that bumetanide is a loop diuretic that may cause significant hypocalcemia. We conclude that careful screening for medications and underlying conditions predisposing to hypocalcemia is recommended to help prevent severe reactions due to citrate toxicity. Laboratory measurement of pre-procedure serum calcium levels in selected donors may identify cases requiring heightened vigilance. The case also illustrates the importance of maintaining preparedness for managing rare but serious reactions in volunteer apheresis blood donors.

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 20 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 %
Unknown 20 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 3 15%
Student > Postgraduate 3 15%
Student > Master 2 10%
Researcher 2 10%
Librarian 1 5%
Other 4 20%
Unknown 5 25%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 45%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 5%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 5%
Psychology 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Unknown 6 30%
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 27 June 2017.
All research outputs
#8,292,507
of 24,811,707 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Clinical Apheresis
#112
of 464 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,289
of 70,521 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Clinical Apheresis
#4
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,811,707 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 464 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% 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 70,521 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.