↓ Skip to main content

Positive end-expiratory airway pressure does not aggravate ventilator-induced diaphragmatic dysfunction in rabbits

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, September 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
45 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
Positive end-expiratory airway pressure does not aggravate ventilator-induced diaphragmatic dysfunction in rabbits
Published in
Critical Care, September 2014
DOI 10.1186/s13054-014-0494-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Catherine SH Sassoon, Ercheng Zhu, Liwei Fang, Gary C Sieck, Scott K Powers

Abstract

IntroductionImmobilization of hindlimb muscles in a shortened position results in an accelerated rate of inactivity-induced muscle atrophy and contractile dysfunction. Similarly, prolonged controlled mechanical ventilation (CMV) results in diaphragm inactivity and induces diaphragm muscle atrophy and contractile dysfunction. Further, the application of positive end-expiratory airway pressure (PEEP) during mechanical ventilation would result in shortened diaphragm muscle fibers throughout the respiratory cycle. Therefore, we tested the hypothesis that compared to CMV without PEEP; the combination of PEEP and CMV would accelerate CMV-induced diaphragm muscle atrophy and contractile dysfunction. To test this hypothesis, we combined PEEP with CMV or with assist-control mechanical ventilation (AMV) and determined the effects on diaphragm muscle atrophy and contractile properties.MethodsThe PEEP level (8 cm H2O) that did not induce lung over-distension or compromise circulation was determined. In vivo segmental length changes of diaphragm muscle fiber were then measured using sonomicrometry. Sedated rabbits were randomized into groups: surgical control, and those receiving CMV, AMV, continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) with, or without PEEP for 2 days. In vitro diaphragmatic force, diaphragm muscle morphometry, myosin heavy-chain (MyHC) protein isoforms, caspase-3, insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1), muscle atrophy F-box (MAFbx) and muscle ring finger-1 (MuRF1) mRNA were measured.ResultsPEEP shortened end-expiratory diaphragm muscle length by 15%, 14% and 12% with CMV, AMV and CPAP, respectively. Combined PEEP and CMV reduced tidal excursion of segmental diaphragm muscle length, consequently tidal volume (VT) decreased. VT was maintained with combined PEEP and AMV. CMV alone decreased maximal tetanic force (Po) production by 35% versus control (P <0.01). Combined PEEP and CMV did not decrease Po further. Po was preserved with AMV with or without PEEP. Diaphragm muscle atrophy did not occur in any fiber types. Diaphragm MyHC shifted to fast isoform in the combined PEEP and CMV group. In both CMV, and combined PEEP and CMV, IGF-1 mRNAs were suppressed, while Caspase-3, MAFbx and MuRF1 mRNA expression was elevated compared to control.ConclusionsTwo days of diaphragm muscle fiber shortening with PEEP did not exacerbate CMV-induced diaphragm muscle dysfunction.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Argentina 1 2%
Brazil 1 2%
Unknown 42 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 20%
Student > Master 9 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 16%
Student > Bachelor 4 9%
Other 3 7%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 7 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 51%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 7%
Physics and Astronomy 1 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 11 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 26 September 2014.
All research outputs
#6,570,939
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#3,726
of 6,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#62,232
of 255,368 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#43
of 112 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
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 is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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 255,368 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 112 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.