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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
The clinical usefulness of extravascular lung water and pulmonary vascular permeability index to diagnose and characterize pulmonary edema: a prospective multicenter study on the quantitative differential diagnostic definition for acute lung injury/acute respiratory distress syndrome
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Critical Care, December 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/cc11898 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Shigeki Kushimoto, Yasuhiko Taira, Yasuhide Kitazawa, Kazuo Okuchi, Teruo Sakamoto, Hiroyasu Ishikura, Tomoyuki Endo, Satoshi Yamanouchi, Takashi Tagami, Junko Yamaguchi, Kazuhide Yoshikawa, Manabu Sugita, Yoichi Kase, Takashi Kanemura, Hiroyuki Takahashi, Yuichi Kuroki, Hiroo Izumino, Hiroshi Rinka, Ryutarou Seo, Makoto Takatori, Tadashi Kaneko, Toshiaki Nakamura, Takayuki Irahara, Nobuyuki Saito, Akihiro Watanabe, The PiCCO Pulmonary Edema Study Group |
| Abstract |
ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION: Acute lung injury (ALI)/acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is characterized by features other than increased pulmonary vascular permeability. Pulmonary vascular permeability combined with increased extravascular lung water content has been considered a quantitative diagnostic criterion of ALI/ARDS. This prospective, multi-institutional, observational study aimed to clarify the clinical pathophysiological features of ALI/ARDS and establish its quantitative diagnostic criteria. METHODS: The extravascular lung water index (EVLWI) and the pulmonary vascular permeability index (PVPI) were measured using the transpulmonary thermodilution method in 266 patients with PaO2/FiO2 ratio ≤ 300 mmHg and bilateral infiltration on chest radiography, in 23 ICUs of academic tertiary referral hospitals. Pulmonary edema was defined as EVLWI ≥ 10 ml/kg. Three experts retrospectively determined the pathophysiological features of respiratory insufficiency by considering the patients' history, clinical presentation, chest computed tomography and radiography, echocardiography, EVLWI and brain natriuretic peptide level, and the time course of all preceding findings under systemic and respiratory therapy. RESULTS: Patients were divided into the following three categories on the basis of the pathophysiological diagnostic differentiation of respiratory insufficiency: ALI/ARDS, cardiogenic edema, and pleural effusion with atelectasis, which were noted in 207 patients, 26 patients, and 33 patients, respectively. EVLWI was greater in ALI/ARDS and cardiogenic edema patients than in patients with pleural effusion with atelectasis (18.5 ± 6.8, 14.4 ± 4.0, and 8.3 ± 2.1, respectively; P < 0.01). PVPI was higher in ALI/ARDS patients than in cardiogenic edema or pleural effusion with atelectasis patients (3.2 ± 1.4, 2.0 ± 0.8, and 1.6 ± 0.5; P < 0.01). In ALI/ARDS patients, EVLWI increased with increasing pulmonary vascular permeability (r = 0.729, P < 0.01) and was weakly correlated with intrathoracic blood volume (r = 0.236, P < 0.01). EVLWI was weakly correlated with the PaO2/FiO2 ratio in the ALI/ARDS and cardiogenic edema patients. A PVPI value of 2.6 to 2.85 provided a definitive diagnosis of ALI/ARDS (specificity, 0.90 to 0.95), and a value < 1.7 ruled out an ALI/ARDS diagnosis (specificity, 0.95). CONCLUSION: PVPI may be a useful quantitative diagnostic tool for ARDS in patients with hypoxemic respiratory failure and radiographic infiltrates. TRIAL REGISTRATION: UMIN-CTR ID UMIN000003627. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 1 | 20% |
| Spain | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 3 | 60% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 80% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 147 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Hungary | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Mexico | 1 | <1% |
| Belgium | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 141 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 29 | 20% |
| Other | 18 | 12% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 15 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 13 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 8% |
| Other | 38 | 26% |
| Unknown | 22 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 91 | 62% |
| Engineering | 8 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 3% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 2% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 9 | 6% |
| Unknown | 29 | 20% |
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 11 January 2013.
All research outputs
#8,543,833
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#4,398
of 6,558 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#86,789
of 286,373 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#37
of 117 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 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 6,558 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.8. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% 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 286,373 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 117 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.