↓ Skip to main content

Treatment of a patient with shock complicating severe falciparum malaria: a case report

Overview of attention for article published in Cases Journal, April 2009
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
33 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
Treatment of a patient with shock complicating severe falciparum malaria: a case report
Published in
Cases Journal, April 2009
DOI 10.1186/1757-1626-2-6644
Pubmed ID
Authors

Friedhelm Kuethe, Ruediger Pfeifer, Silke Rummler, Katharina Bauer, Virginia Kamvissi, Wolfgang Pfister

Abstract

Malaria is a potentially life-threatening disease, especially when complicated by a septic shock. When patients present in such a critical condition, the currently available literature allows a dilemma to develop as to which the correct treatment strategy is concerning fluid resuscitation. A 55-year-old Caucasian man was admitted to the intensive care unit with the clinical picture of severe malaria, brought by a Plasmodium falciparum infection. On admission, the patient was confused, had high fever up to 40 degrees C, and his blood analysis revealed a severe thrombocytopenia, a parasitemia of 25.5%, and biochemical features indicative of severe malaria. The patient received quinine and underwent two automated red cell exchanges by use of a centrifuge-driven cell separator. Two days after admission, the patient developed a septic shock. He received an "early-goal" treatment, according to the surviving sepsis campaign guidelines, which propose fluid resuscitation. The existing recommendations concerning the treatment of severe malaria that favour a restrictive fluid administration were disregarded. Fluid therapy was guided by regular measurements of the central venous pressure, blood pressure and monitoring of the hemodynamic status. The patient survived the shock and the subsequent multiorgan failure, which required mechanical ventilation and dialysis. After 12 days in the intensive care unit and an additional three weeks of hospitalization, the patient was discharged to rehabilitation. The authors believe that in patients with severe malaria complicated by septic shock, the treatment of sepsis and septic shock should be the one of first priority.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 33 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 5 15%
Other 3 9%
Lecturer 3 9%
Unspecified 3 9%
Student > Postgraduate 3 9%
Other 6 18%
Unknown 10 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 42%
Unspecified 3 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Arts and Humanities 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 9 27%
Attention Score in Context

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 14 July 2019.
All research outputs
#20,414,746
of 22,965,074 outputs
Outputs from Cases Journal
#217
of 250 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#89,795
of 93,614 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cases Journal
#15
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,965,074 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 250 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.2. 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 93,614 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 19 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.