↓ Skip to main content

Supporting hemodynamics: what should we target? What treatments should we use?

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, March 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
twitter
7 X users
q&a
1 Q&A thread

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
113 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
Supporting hemodynamics: what should we target? What treatments should we use?
Published in
Critical Care, March 2013
DOI 10.1186/cc11502
Pubmed ID
Authors

Luciano Gattinoni, Eleonora Carlesso

Abstract

Assessment and monitoring of hemodynamics is a cornerstone in critically ill patients as hemodynamic alteration may become life-threatening in a few minutes. Defining normal values in critically ill patients is not easy, because 'normality' is usually referred to healthy subjects at rest. Defining 'adequate' hemodynamics is easier, which embeds whatever pressure and flow set is sufficient to maintain the aerobic metabolism. We will refer to the unifying hypothesis proposed by Schrier several years ago. Accordingly, the alteration of three independent variables - heart (contractility and rate), vascular tone and intravascular volume - may lead to underfilling of the arterial tree, associated with reduced (as during myocardial infarction or hemorrhage) or expanded (sepsis or cirrhosis) plasma volume. The underfilling is sensed by the arterial baroreceptors, which activate primarily the sympathetic nervous system and renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system, as well as vasopressin, to restore the arterial filling by increasing the vascular tone and retaining sodium and water. Under 'normal' conditions, therefore, the homeostatic system is not activated and water/sodium excretion, heart rate and oxygen extraction are in the range found in normal subjects. When arterial underfilling occurs, the mechanisms are activated (sodium and water retention) - associated with low central venous oxygen saturation (ScvO2) if underfilling is caused by low flow/hypovolemia, or with normal/high ScvO2 if associated with high flow/hypervolemia. Although the correction of hemodynamics should be towards the correction of the independent determinants, the usual therapy performed is volume infusion. An accepted target is ScvO2 >70%, although this ignores the arterial underfilling associated with volume expansion/high flow. For large-volume resuscitation the worst solution is normal saline solution (chloride load, strong ion difference = 0, acidosis). To avoid changes in acid-base equilibrium the strong ion difference of the infused solution should be equal to the baseline bicarbonate concentration.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 113 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 2 2%
Italy 1 <1%
Czechia 1 <1%
Unknown 109 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 18 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 13%
Researcher 14 12%
Student > Postgraduate 13 12%
Student > Bachelor 8 7%
Other 27 24%
Unknown 18 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 77 68%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 3%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 2%
Chemistry 2 2%
Other 5 4%
Unknown 18 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. 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 17 August 2020.
All research outputs
#1,811,209
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#1,616
of 6,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,282
of 208,477 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#14
of 177 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,554 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 208,477 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 177 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.