↓ Skip to main content

A systematic review of neuroprotective strategies after cardiac arrest: from bench to bedside (Part I – Protection via specific pathways)

Overview of attention for article published in Medical Gas Research, May 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
60 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
A systematic review of neuroprotective strategies after cardiac arrest: from bench to bedside (Part I – Protection via specific pathways)
Published in
Medical Gas Research, May 2014
DOI 10.1186/2045-9912-4-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dustin B Mangus, Lei Huang, Patricia M Applegate, Jason W Gatling, John Zhang, Richard L Applegate

Abstract

Neurocognitive deficits are a major source of morbidity in survivors of cardiac arrest. Treatment options that could be implemented either during cardiopulmonary resuscitation or after return of spontaneous circulation to improve these neurological deficits are limited. We conducted a literature review of treatment protocols designed to evaluate neurologic outcome and survival following cardiac arrest with associated global cerebral ischemia. The search was limited to investigational therapies that were utilized to treat global cerebral ischemia associated with cardiac arrest. In this review we discuss potential mechanisms of neurologic protection following cardiac arrest including actions of several medical gases such as xenon, argon, and nitric oxide. The 3 included mechanisms are: 1. Modulation of neuronal cell death; 2. Alteration of oxygen free radicals; and 3. Improving cerebral hemodynamics. Only a few approaches have been evaluated in limited fashion in cardiac arrest patients and results show inconclusive neuroprotective effects. Future research focusing on combined neuroprotective strategies that target multiple pathways are compelling in the setting of global brain ischemia resulting from cardiac arrest.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Unknown 59 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 11 18%
Student > Master 7 12%
Researcher 6 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 6 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 8%
Other 18 30%
Unknown 7 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 42%
Neuroscience 6 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 3%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 15 25%
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 20 August 2014.
All research outputs
#18,371,959
of 22,755,127 outputs
Outputs from Medical Gas Research
#226
of 333 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#164,646
of 227,857 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Medical Gas Research
#2
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,755,127 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 333 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.0. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% 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 227,857 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.