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 |
Citrobacter braakii bacteremia-induced septic shock after colonoscopy preparation with polyethylene glycol in a critically ill patient: a case report
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Annals of Clinical Microbiology and Antimicrobials, April 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12941-017-0201-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Tetsuya Yumoto, Yoshiyasu Kono, Seiji Kawano, Chihiro Kamoi, Atsuyoshi Iida, Motoko Nose, Keiji Sato, Toyomu Ugawa, Hiroyuki Okada, Yoshihito Ujike, Atsunori Nakao |
| Abstract |
Polyethylene glycol (PEG) is widely used for bowel cleaning in preparation for colonoscopy because of its safety. Septic shock after PEG preparation is an extremely rare complication. Herein, we describe a case of septic shock that occurred immediately after colonoscopy preparation with PEG. A 75-year-old Japanese male who had previously developed diabetes after total pancreatectomy received PEG in preparation for colonoscopy. He had been admitted to the emergency intensive care unit 4 days earlier due to hematochezia presenting with shock. He ingested PEG to prepare for a colonoscopy examination, which was performed to identify the source of his bleeding over a 5-h period, but suddenly exhibited septic shock and markedly elevated procalcitonin levels. A blood culture subsequently revealed Citrobacter braakii. Immediate resuscitation and intensive care with appropriate antibiotics improved his condition. Clinicians should be aware of the possibility of deteriorating conditions after bowel preparation with PEG among severely ill patients with recent episodes of hemorrhagic shock. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 34 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 6 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 15% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 12% |
| Researcher | 3 | 9% |
| Other | 4 | 12% |
| Unknown | 8 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 19 | 56% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 3% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 9% |
| Unknown | 8 | 24% |
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 10 April 2017.
All research outputs
#20,413,129
of 22,963,381 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Clinical Microbiology and Antimicrobials
#537
of 610 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#269,322
of 308,980 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Clinical Microbiology and Antimicrobials
#32
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,963,381 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 610 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.3. 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 308,980 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 34 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.