↓ Skip to main content

Is inhaled colistin beneficial in ventilator associated pneumonia or nosocomial pneumonia caused by Acinetobacter baumannii?

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Clinical Microbiology and Antimicrobials, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
40 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
70 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
Is inhaled colistin beneficial in ventilator associated pneumonia or nosocomial pneumonia caused by Acinetobacter baumannii?
Published in
Annals of Clinical Microbiology and Antimicrobials, February 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12941-016-0123-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tuna Demirdal, Ummu Sena Sari, Salih Atakan Nemli

Abstract

In the present study, our objective was to evaluate and compare the clinical and microbiological results in patients receiving systemic and systemic plus inhaled colistin therapy due to nosocomial pneumonia (NP) or ventilator associated pneumonia (VAP) caused by Acinetobacter baumannii. A retrospective matched case-control study was performed at the ICUs at Izmir Katip Celebi University Ataturk Training and Research Hospital from January 2013 to December 2014. Eighty patients who received only systemic colistin were matched 43 patients who received systemic colistin combined with inhaled therapy. In 97.6 % of the patients colistin was co-administered with at least one additional antibiotic. The most frequently co-administered antibiotics were carbapenems (79.7 %). The patient groups did not differ significantly in terms of the non-colistin antibiotics used for treatment (p > 0.05). Acute renal injury was observed in 53.8 % and 48.8 % of the patients who received parenteral colistin or parenteral plus inhaler colistin, respectively (p = 0.603). There were no significant differences between the groups in terms of clinical success (p = 0.974), clinical failure (p = 0.291), or recurrence (p = 0.094). Only, a significantly higher partial clinical improvement rate was observed in the systemic colistin group (p = 0.009). No significant differences between the two groups in terms of eradication (p = 0.712), persistence (p = 0.470), or recurrence (p = 0.356) rates was observed. One-month mortality rate was similar in systemic (47.5 %) and systemic plus inhaled (53.5 %) treatment groups (p = 0.526). Our results suggest that combination of inhaled colistin with intravenous colistin had no additional therapeutic benefit in terms of clinical or microbiological outcomes.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 70 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 10%
Student > Postgraduate 6 9%
Other 6 9%
Student > Bachelor 6 9%
Other 16 23%
Unknown 22 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 23%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 7%
Immunology and Microbiology 5 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Other 12 17%
Unknown 26 37%
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 03 April 2016.
All research outputs
#14,915,133
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Clinical Microbiology and Antimicrobials
#252
of 678 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#150,997
of 313,159 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Clinical Microbiology and Antimicrobials
#12
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 678 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% 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 313,159 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 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.