↓ Skip to main content

Sequential broncho-alveolar lavages reflect distinct pulmonary compartments: clinical and research implications in lung transplantation

Overview of attention for article published in Respiratory Research, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (59th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 tweeters

Readers on

mendeley
13 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
Sequential broncho-alveolar lavages reflect distinct pulmonary compartments: clinical and research implications in lung transplantation
Published in
Respiratory Research, May 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12931-018-0786-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Liran Levy, Stephen C. Juvet, Kristen Boonstra, Lianne G. Singer, Sassan Azad, Betty Joe, Marcelo Cypel, Shaf Keshavjee, Tereza Martinu

Abstract

Bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) has proven to be very useful to monitor the lung allograft after transplantation. In addition to allowing detection of infections, multiple BAL analytes have been proposed as potential biomarkers of lung allograft rejection or dysfunction. However, BAL collection is not well standardized and differences in BAL collection represent an important source of variation. We hypothesized that there are systematic differences between sequential BALs that are relevant to BAL analysis. As part of 126 consecutive bronchoscopies in lung transplant recipients, two sequential BALs (BAL1 and BAL2) were performed in one location during each bronchoscopy by instilling and suctioning 50 ml of normal saline twice into separate containers. Cell concentration, viability and differentials, Surfactant Protein-D (SP-D), Club Cell Secretory Protein (CCSP), and levels of CXCL10, IL-10, CCL2, CCL5, VEGF-C, RAGE, CXCL9, CXCL1, IL-17A, IL-21, PDGF, and GCSF were compared between BAL1 and BAL2. Total cell concentration did not differ between BAL1 and BAL2; however, compared to BAL2, BAL1 had more dead cells, epithelial cells, neutrophils, and higher concentrations of airway epithelium-derived CCSP and inflammatory markers. BAL2 had a higher concentration of SP-D compared to BAL1. In this study performed in lung transplant recipients, we show that sequential BALs represent different lung compartments and have distinct compositions. BAL1 represents the airway compartment with more epithelial cells, neutrophils, and epithelium-derived CCSP. Conversely, BAL2 samples preferentially the distal bronchoalveolar space with greater cell viability and higher SP-D. Our findings illustrate how the method of BAL collection can influence analyte concentrations and further emphasize the need for a standardized approach in translational research involving BAL samples.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 13 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 13 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Professor > Associate Professor 3 23%
Student > Postgraduate 2 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 15%
Student > Bachelor 1 8%
Student > Master 1 8%
Other 2 15%
Unknown 2 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 38%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 15%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 8%
Unspecified 1 8%
Other 1 8%
Unknown 2 15%

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 30 October 2018.
All research outputs
#7,000,371
of 13,813,295 outputs
Outputs from Respiratory Research
#686
of 1,694 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#111,142
of 275,870 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Respiratory Research
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,813,295 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,694 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% 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 275,870 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them